IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-S) 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


u:  mk 


2.2 
2.0 


1.4 


1.8 


1.6 


V] 


^^ 


y 


L<y 


iV 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


1980 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibiiographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibiiographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


□    Colrured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


I      I    Covers  damaged/ 


D 
D 
D 
D 
D 
D 

n 


D 


Couverture  endommagde 

Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaur6e  et/ou  pelliculde 

Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 

Coloured  maps/ 

Cartes  gdographiques  en  couleur 

Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 

Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reli6  avec  d'autres  documents 

Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  reliure  serrde  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  int^rieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peu'i  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajoutdes 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte. 
mais,  lorsque  cela  dtait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6t6  film^es. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppldmentaires; 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exempiaire 
qu'il  lui  a  6t6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exempiaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  m6thode  normale  de  fiimage 
sont  indiqu6s  ci-dessous. 

□    Coloured  pages/ 
Pages  de  couleur 

□    Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagdes 

|~~1    Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 


D 


Pages  restaurdes  et/ou  peiliculdes 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxei 
Pages  d6color6es,  tachetdes  ou  piqudes 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d6tach6es 

Showthroughy 
Transparence 

Quality  of  prir 

Qualitd  in^gale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  materii 
Comprend  du  materiel  supplementaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


r~p(  Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 

I      I  Pages  detached/ 

I      I  Showthrough/ 

I      I  Quality  of  print  varies/ 

I      I  Includes  supplementary  material/ 

I — I  Only  edition  available/ 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  6t6  filmdes  d  nouveau  de  fa^on  d 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


0 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  film6  au  taux  de  rMuction  Indiqu6  ci-dessous. 


10X 

14X 

18X 

22X 

26X 

30X 

y 

12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

Ralph  Pickard  Bell  Library 
Mount  Allison  University 


L'exemplaire  filmd  fut  reproduit  grdce  d  la 
gdn6rosit6  de: 

Ralph  Pickard  Bell  Library 
Mount  Allison  University 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  leyibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  6td  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettetd  de  l'exemplaire  filmd,  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  -♦>  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED "),  or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 

Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimde  sont  film6s  en  commen^ant 
par  le  premier  piat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernidre  page  qui  comporte  'jne  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  film6s  en  commenpant  par  la 
premidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaitra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbole  — ►  signifie  "A  SUIVRE",  le 
symbole  V  signifie  "FIN". 

Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
filmds  d  des  taux  de  reduction  diffdrents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clich6,  il  est  filmd  d  partir 
de  Tangle  supdrieur  gauche,  de  gauche  h  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  ndcesseire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  mdthode. 


1  2  3 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

.".4"  JW>-Ju.ti^ 


(■ 


t!t^t  Miiahitt  ^tmt. 


BY    THE    REV.    B.    F.    DeCOSTA, 

Author  of  "The   Pre-Columbian   Discovery  of  America   by  the  Northmen." 


NEW  YORK: 

Aisrsoisr  r>.  m,  randot^ph  &  co. 

1871. 


"_;—:: —  r:':rr'J!3e5*-^-w«w! 


MVPfl«|i|l|«U'iil'- 


I 


PJ 

502)1 
D4 


THE  MOABITE  STONE. 


ERUAPS  it  would  hardly  be  an  exaggeration  to  say,  that 
there  are  two  antiquities:  an  antiquity  of  the  Past  and 
an  antiquity  of  the  Future.  One  is  the  inspiration  of  his- 
tory;  the  other  the  burden  of  prophetic  song.  If  this  were  not  so, 
how  could  Abraham  have  seen  the  day  of  Christ,  or  Christianity 
become  venerable  before  its  founder  was  born?  And  both  of 
these  periods  belong  to  the  antiquary,  if  he  wills  it  so. 

At  the  present  time  there  are  too  many  vague  views  abroad  in 
regard  to  what  constitutes  the  antiquary  and  his  vocation.     First 


NoTK  — This  paper  was  contributed  to  the  AMBnicAjf  QuAntERLY  Church  Rbview, 
to  appear  in  July,  1871.    It  was  based  on  the  following  works  : 

The  Moahile  Stone';  a  f«c-iS'i»ii7eof  the  original  inscription,  with  an  English  Transla- 
tion and  a  historical  and  critical  Commentary. 

The  Palestine  Exploration  Fund :  Quarterly  Statement,  No.  VI. 

The  Recovery  of  Jerusalem  :  an  Account  of  Recent  Excavations  and  Discoveries  in  the 
Holy  City.  By  Captain  Wilson,  R,  E.  and  Capt^.ln  Warren,  R.  E.,  with  an  Introduc- 
tory Chapter  by  Dean  Stanley. 

It  was  the  aim  of  the  author  of  this  paper  to  give  a  resume  of  the  whole  question,  and 
present  the  facts  connected  with  the  Moabite  Stone  in  a  form  adapted  for  general  use, 
and  free  as  possible  from  technicalities.  The  article  includes  all  the  facts  known  to  the 
author  down  to  the  present  time  (June  13) ;  but  it  is  stated  that  Dr.  Ginsburg  is  already 
preparing  a  second  edition  of  his  learned  and  valuable  work.  It  is  not  apprehended, 
however,  that  he  will  find  anything  of  importance  to  recall,  but  it  is  thought  that 
he  may  give  us  additional  light  in  regard  to  the  closing  portions  of  the  inscription.  It 
is  to  be  hoped  that  this  paper  may  contribute  something  to  the  interest  already  felt  in 
the  American  Palestine  Exploration  Fund,  at  least  among  those  students  of  Biblical 
Antiquities  into  whose  hands  it  is  likely  to  fall. 

8 


The  Moallte  Stone. 


?', 


of  all,  there  is  the  notion,  that  the  antiquary  is  a  man  of  the  Past. 
But  if  the  remark  already  made  be  true,  this  view  should  be  dis- 
missed. Indeed  we  do  wrong  when  we  consider  the  antiquary  as 
one  wrapped  up  exclusively  in  the  Past,  like  the  madman  who,  last 
year,  was  enamored  of  Cleopatra;  and  regard  him  as  one  out  of 
sympathy  with  the  Present,  and  hopeless  of  the  Future.  The  true 
antiquary  is  no  musty,  retired  individual,  backward  in  his  motions, 
narrow  in  his  aims,  pVone  to  magnify  trifles  and  hoard  his  possessions, 
and  view  all  recent  times  as  out  of  joint.  Yet,  it  is  to  be  regretted, 
this  falsv,  conception  is  embodied  in  literature,  while,  worst  of 
all,  it  is  often  justified  by  living  examples.  Too  few  of  our  an- 
tiquaries ever  feel  like  Arnold  of  Rugby,  who,  when  he  saw  the  first 
railroad  train  rushing  down  on  its  way  from  the  metropolis, 
thanked  God  that  the  feudal  age  was  past.  And  this  is  why  we 
have  the  narrow  statement  of  Webster,  the  prince  of  definers,  to 
the  effect,  that  an  antiquary  is  "one  versed  in  antiquity;"  and 
hence  the  sarcasm  of  Pope,  who  says: 

"  With  sharpened  sight  pale  antiquaries  pore, 
The  inscription  value,  but  the  rust  adore  ;" 

while  Waiter  Scott  insinuates  that  the  antiquary  is  a  dolt. 

But,  as  far  as  possible,  the  Past  should  be  made  a  thing  for 
present  and  prospective  use.  While  Ave  admire  the  setting  sun 
our  heart  and  hopes  should  be  with  the  coming  day.  If  we  go 
backward,  it  should  be  for  the  purposes  of  an  advance.  The  Past 
is  not  dead,  and  the  ages  that  are  gone  should  be  laid  under  living 
contribution  for  our  own  day.  The  Past  cannot  die.  Often  when 
an  age  is  dismissed  from  the  calendar  it  then  begins,  for  the  first 
time,  to  live,  and  to  bo  powerfully  felt.  It  is,  therefore,  the  bu- 
siness of  the  antiquary  to  study  the  Past  for  the  benefit  of  all  suc- 
ceeding times.  He  must  deal  not  alone  with  its  rust,  but  with  its 
reasons,  v^'ith  whatsoever  is  good  and  true,  and  useful  to  living  men. 
His  studies  should  be  made  to  L^inister  to  human  hopes,  to  dispel 
the  mysteries  of  the  Present,  the  ke^  of  which  is  buried  in  the 
mouldy  Past,  and  thus  do  all  in  his  power  to  save  the  world  from 
errors  and  superstitions  which,  even  now  in  the  Nineteenth  Century, 
linger  amid  its  light  like  belated  ghosts,  not  yet  dismissed  to  their 
Qongenial  shades.  In  a  word,  the  antiquary  who  does  nothing  for 
his  own  times  is  unworthy  of  the  profession  and  the  name. 


I 


The  Moahite  Stone.  6 

The  antiquary  should  also  be  known  by  his  broad,  comprehen- 
sive and  liberal  spirit.  While  a  man,  not  of  one,  but  of  every 
age,  so  be  should  be  a  citizen  of  every  country,  ignoring  the  pro- 
vincial s[)irit  that  seeks  to  .shed  exclusive  glory  around  some  fa- 
vored spot;  a  spirit  that  is  often  the  abettor  of  falseliot  1  and  the 
foster-father  of  fraud.  lie  should  be  a  man  of  the  world,  in  the 
highest  and  noblest  sense.  Sic  non  vohis  is  the  motto  his  banner 
should  bear,  while  he  goes  onward  in  his  investigations,  jealous  of 
no  man's  well  earned  and  consequently  well-deserved  fame,  open 
to  the  truth  as  the  day  to  the  light,  and  in  sympathy  with  the 
progress  of  mankind. 

Nor  will  the  world  ever  fail  to  applaud  the  antiquary  who  thus 
deals  with  the  Past  for  the  benefit  of  the  Present,  or  be  slow  to  re- 
cognize his  superior  aims.  The  spirit  in  which  a  man  pursues 
his  calling  possesses  a  peculiar  and  easily-recognized  significance. 
Especially  is  this  the  case  in  connection  with  biblical  and  ecclesias- 
tical antiquities,  where  the  tone  of  the  investigator's  mind 
reveals  his  purpose,  and  his  methods  tell  us  what  the  world  has 
to  hope  from  his  aims.  The  spirit  of  the  antiquary  often  indicates 
whether  he  is  din;<;ing  around  the  roots  of  a  reliojion  that  is  false 
or  true,  and  shows  the  hopefulness  of  his  Christianity.  It  is  even 
not  too  much  to  say,  that  we  may  judge  of  a  school  of  religious 
thought  by  the  character  of  the  historical  researches  to  which  it 
gives  rise;  for  every  school  of  thought  refers  to  the  Past,  in  con- 
nection with  its  aspirations  for  the  Future.  These  researches  sig- 
nify plainly  whether  the  school  in  question  is  mining  deep,  or 
merely  scratching  upon  the  surface.  What,  then,  shall  we  say  of 
that  ecclesiastical  antiquary  who  strains  every  nerve  to  find  an 
ancient  surplice  for  the  man  who  needs  a  soul, — and  whose  zeal 
reaches  its  climax  with  the  acquisition  of  some  long-forgotten  or- 
nament to  wear  over  a  brain  that  is  numb,  or  a  heart  that  is  cold  ? 

On  the  other  hand,  how  noble  are  the  investigations  of  those 
students  of  antiquity  whose  researches  deal  with  the  o'-iginal  ele- 
ments of  Sacred  History,  and  who  have  for  their  subject  themes 
connected  with  the  Providence  and  Word  of  God.  Exhibitions 
like  these  indicate  the  deep  source  from  which  they  spring,  and,  at 
the  samo  time,  assure  us,  that  the  investigators  are  in  sympathy 
•with  '^nat  class  of  religionists  of  whom  the  world  has  many  hopes. 
These  are  the  researches  of  the  living   Church,  the  studies,  of  a 


1 


^x=;; 


6 


The  Moahitc  Stone. 


devout  and  robust  Christianity,  which,  unlike  mediaeval  archae- 
ology, and  ultramontane  antiquity,  has  nothing  to  invent  and 
nothing  to  conceal.  Otherwise  it  is,  in  the  main,  and  with  some 
distinguished  exceptions,  the  reforming  branch  of  the  Church  of  God, 
whose  archicological  labors  possess  this  hopeful  significance;  for 
while  the  decrepid  and  legend-loving  section  entertains  its  votaries 
with  the  sordid  shoes  of  Joseph  of  Arimathea,  the  Palestine  Ex- 
ploration Society,  speaking  for  the  great  party  of  progress,  gives 
to  the  world  discoveries,  that  excite  genuine  wonder,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  foster,  not  a  shallow  credulity,  but  a  deep  and  rever- 
ential faith.  Thus  widely  divergent  in  their  dogmas  and  investi- 
gations, the  two  wings  of  the  Church  go  on  in  their  work,  the  one 
party  putting  manuscripts,  like  the  Sinaitio  Codex,  into  the 
rubbish  box,  and  the  other  taking  them  out ;  the  one  in  the  Con- 
vent of  St.  Catherine,  filling  the  traveler's  ears  with  idle  tales,  and 
the  other,  measuring  rod  and  theodolite  in  hand,  giving  scien- 
tific surveys  of  the  whole  G ebal-Mousa  region,  thus  localising  the 
encampments  of  Moses  and  disposing  of  infidel  sneers;  the  one 
inventing  traditions  over  the  site  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  the  other 
digging  around  the  walls  of  ancient  Jerusalem,  fixing  the  positions 
of  the  towers,  marking  the  remains  of  ancient  bulwarks,  and  har- 
monizing the  statements  of  early  historians  with  the  declarations 
of  the  inspired  Word. 

All  these  things  go  to  illustrate  the  wide  difference  existing  be- 
tween what  we  might  call  the  two  religions,  but  which  are,  never- 
theless, only  two  forms  of  the  old  faith,  one  of  which  represents 
repression,  and  the  other  the  spirit  of  free,  enlightened  inquiry. 
It  is  hardly  necessary  to  prophesy  the  final  effect  upon  the  world. 

But  let  us  now  turn  to  the  more  immediate  subject  of 
this  Article,  the  Moabite  Stone,  which  is  beyond  question  one  of 
the  most  valuable  of  all  recently-discovered  monuments  of  an- 
tiquity. 

First,  however,  let  us  make  one  observation  in  regard  to  the 
volume  lately  published  by  the  conductors  of  the  Palestine  Explo- 
ration, a  volume  which  shows  in  the  most  striking  manner  how 
genuine  antiquarian  research  is  conducted  in  the  interest  of  our 
own  times. 

We  find,  that  in  1864,  the  condition  of  Jerusalem  had  become 
so  unhealthy  as  to  excite  great  commiseration,  as  well  as  alarm, 


f 


The  Moahite  Stone. 


for  the  safety  of  the  inhabitants.  The  uncleanliness  had  every- 
where) become  intolerable,  both  on  account  of  the  great  lack  of 
sewerage,  and  suitable  supplies  of  pure  water.  Century  after 
century  the  rubbish  had  everywhere  been  accumulating,  until  at 
last  it  was  thought  by  philanthropists  that  something  should  im- 
mediately be  done  for  the  relief  of  the  suffering  people.  At  this 
juncture,  Miss  Burdett  Coutts,  always  foremost  in  good  works, 
manifested  a  deep  interest  in  the  subject,  and  contributed  a  liberal 
sum  for  the  purpose  of  making  the  needed  examinations  to  discover 
the  old  water-course  through  which,  in  ancient  times,  the  fair  city 
of  God  received  those  supplies  which  the  rock-hewn  cisterns  alone 
could  not  yield.*  The  Jerusalem  of  the  Past  was,  therefore,  made 
the  subject  of  exact  archajological  inquiry  for  the  benefit  of  the 
Jerusalem  of  the  Present,  with  its  narrow  quarters,  its  fever- 
breeding  streets,  and  its  wretched  inhabitants,  to  whom  impure 
water  is  sold  in  goat-skin  sacks  from  door  lo  door.  And  the  in- 
quiry thus  made  for  the  ancient  aqueduct, — in  order  that  the 
needed  supplies  might  bo  furnished  Avithout  money  and  without 
price  from  fountains  bubbling  up  with  crystal,  pure  and  sparkling, 
as  the  dew  distilled  on  Hermon's  Hill, — has  led  to  other  discove- 
ries than  those  originally  anticipated.  Here,  then,  we  have  a 
noble  illustration  of  the  usefulness  of  antiquarian  research;  in  con- 
nection with  which,  in  addition  to  the  partial  recovery  of  Jerusa- 
lem, has  also  been  brought  to  light  the  monument  known  as  the 
Moabite  Stone,  a  relic  of  the  highest  value. 

In  discussing  this  remarkable  monument  of  antiquity,  it  will  be 
necessary  to  inform  the  reader  of  the  circumstances  attending  its 
discovery ;  venturing  also  a  few  remarks  on  the  Moabites,  and  the 
region  where  they  found  their  home. 

Moab  was  the  son  of  Lot's  elder  daughter,  and  brother  of  Am- 
mon,  the  father  of  the  Ammonites.  From  the  "cradle  of  the  race 
of  liot  "  in  the  mountains  above  Zoar,  situated  east  of  the  Jordan 


*  "  It  may  be  added,  that  in  this  investigation  the  interesting  question  of  the  sup- 
posed spring  within  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  and  under  the  Temple  Courts,  has  been  for 
the  first  time  followed  to  bottom ;  and  the  result  appears  to  be,  that,  while  there  is  no 
actual  spring  within  the  walls,  the  whole  mount  is  so  honey-combed  with  cisterns  as  to 
give  ample  materials  for  the  conjecture  of  Tacitus,  and  for  the  imagery  of  Scripture, 
while,  at  the  same  time,  it  takes  away  from  them  the  foundation  of  exact  and  literal 
truth."     {Recovery  of  Jerusalem,  p.  xvi). 


8 


The  Moabite  Stone. 


i 


and  north-cast  of  the  Dead  Sea,  tlie  brother-tribes  spread  far  and 
wide.  Ainmon  went  to  the  north-east,  and  occupied  tliosc  waste 
places  possibly  known  at  an  earlier  day  as  Ham,  inhabited  by  Zu- 
zim,  while  Moab,  with  a  more  peaceful  and  settled  disposition,  re- 
mained nearer  his  original  seat.  Among  tlie  fertile  highlands 
which  crown  the  eastern  borders  of  the  Dead  Sea  and  extend 
northward  to  the  mountains  of  Gilead,  the  children  of  Moab  be- 
came firmly  established,  the  original  inhi  'itants  known  as  the 
Enims  gradually  becoming  extinct  before  the  invaders,  even  as  the 
American  aboriginal  tribes  disap[)earcd  on  the  approach  of  the 
Europeans.  Tliey  thus  became  possessed  of  a  district  ecpial  in 
its  pastoral  capacities  to  the  agricultural  advantages  of  IMiilistia 
and  Sharon,  located  by  the  sea.  Yet  of  the  highlands  they  were 
not  the  sole  possessors,  since,  ere  long,  the  Ammonites  crossed  the 
Jordan,  and  pushed  them  back  southward  behind  the  natural 
boundary  of  the  River  Arnon.  At  the  time  the  Israelites  reached 
this  region  in  their  journeys,  the  two  tribes  were  engaged  in  war, 
and  Sihon  had  taken  Heshboii  and  reigned  there,  while  his  victory 
was  recited  in  a  sort  of  popular  ballad  now  preserved  in  the  Book 
of  Numbers.     (Chap.  xxi.  27). 

Of  the  connection  of  Moses  with  this  people  it  will  not  be  ne- 
cessary here  to  speak,  and  we  need  only  to  add  that  after  attain- 
ing to  a  large  degree  of  civilization  and  power  the  Moabites  were 
at  last  destroyed,  «nd  the  cities  that  they  built  became  desolate, 
the  modern  Bedouins  now  being  left  in  the  land  as  their  repre- 
sentatives, while  some  have  sought  to  discover  descendants  in  the 
well-known  tribe  of  Druses.  The  region  whei-e  they  dwelt,  like 
other  places  east  of  the  Jordan,  has  been  little  visited,  and  is 
poorly  known.  Only  a  comparatively  small  amount  of  informa- 
tion has  been  contributed  by  Seetzen,  Burckhardt,  Irby  and  Man- 
gles, and  De  Saulcy  ;  but  while  there  may  be  some  difference  of 
opinion  on  certain  points  connected  with  the  country,  all  agree 
that  it  abounds  in  an  extraordinary  number  of  ruins.  Among  these 
ruins  is  that  of  Diban,  the  ancient  Dibon  of  Scripture,  whose 
name,  while  slightly  varied  in  orthography,  to-day  maintains  the 
old  sound.  It  was  in  this  remarkable  region  that  the  Moabite 
Stone  was  found,  preserved  intact  by  the  rainless  climate  so  many 
hundred  years. 

The  story  of  the  discovery  is  very  easily  told,  bui  the  history 


The  Moahite  Stone. 


9 


of  the  steps  taken  to  secure  the  treasure  is  not  perfectly  plain, 
since  the  Bedouins,  so  intimately  concernetl  in  the  affair,  after 
beginning  negotiations  in  an  atnicablo  spirit,  ended  with  a  lamen- 
table quarrel,  in  the  course  of  which  the  stone  was  reduced  to 
fragments. 

It  appears  that  the  discoverer  of  this  stone  was  the  Rev.  F. 
Klein,  a  German  in  the  service  of  the  English  Church  Missionary 
Society,  who,  in  1868,  made  a  journey  to  Jebel  Ajloon  and  the 
Belka,  and,  August  19th,  arrived  at  Dibftn  (ancient  Dibon)  about 
one  hour  north  of  the  Wady  Majeb  (Arnon),  lie  tells  us  that, 
for  the  sake  of  his  friend  Zattam,  son  of  the  Sheik  of  the  famous 
Beni-Sachr,  under  whose  protection  he  traveled,  he  was  received 
in  the  most  friendly  way  by  the  tribe  of  the  Beni-IIamideh,  en- 
camped near  Diban.  Carpets  were  spread  in  the  tent  of  tlio  Sheik 
and  coffee  prepared  with  all  the  usual  ceremony.  And  while  they 
were  engaged  with  tl'e  entertainment,  Zattam  informed  hiin  that, 
among  the  ruins  of  Dibati,  scarcely  ten  minutes  from  the  present 
encampment,  was  an  interesting  stone  with  an  inscription  that  no 
one  heretofore  had  been  able  to  read.  Mr.  Klein  was  at  once 
filled  with  impatience,  but  was  unable  to  persuade  Zattam  to  leave 
his  couch  and  narghilee.  Accordingly  the  Slieik  of  Beni-IIami- 
deh, who  spoke  of  the  stone  as  one  of  the  wonders  of  the  region, 
volunteered  to  show  him  the  way ;  declaring  what  was  perfectly 
true,  namely,  that  no  European  had  yet  looked  upon  the  treasure. 
Mr.  Klein  says : 

"When  I  came  to  the  spot  where  this  precious  relic  of  antiqui- 
ty was  lying  on  the  ground,  I  was  delighted  at  the  sight,  and  at 
the  same  time  greatly  vexed  I  did  not  come  earlier,  in  order  to 
have  an  opportunity  of  copying  at  least  a  good  part  of  the  in- 
scription, which  I  might  then  under  the  protection  of  Zattam  have 
done  without  the  least  molestation.  I,  however,  had  time  enough 
to  examine  the  stone  and  its  inscription  at  leisure,  and  to  copy  a 
few  words  from  several  lines  at  random,  chiefly  with  a  view,  on  my 
return  to  Jerusalem,  to  ascertain  the  language  of  the  inscription, 
and  prevail  on  some  friends  of  science  to  obtain  either  a  complete 
copy  of  the  inscription,  or,  better,  the  monument  itself. 

"  The  stone  was  lying  among  the  ruins  of  Diban  perfectly  free 
and  exposed  to  view,  the  inscription  uppermost.  I  got  four  men 
to  turn  it  round  (it  was  a  basaltic  stone,  exceedingly  heavy)  in  or- 


wnrnf^mpimmmm 


f9mm 


-'■■—rrT. 


mmms^. 


10 


The  Moabite  Stone. 


der  to  ascertain  whether  there  was  no  inscription  on  the  other  side, 
and  found  that  it  was  perfectly  smooth  and  without  any  inscrip- 
tion or  other  marks.  What  time  was  left  me  before  sunset  I  now 
cuiployed  in  examining,  measuring,  and  making  a  correct  sketch 
of  the  stone,  besides  endeavoring  to  collect  a  perfect  alphabet  from 
the  inscription." 

On  his  return  to  Jerusalem,  he  showed  the  sketch  and  parts  of 
the  inscription  to  Dr.  Peterman,  who  took  immediate  steps  to  se- 
cure the  stone  for  e  Museum  of  Berlin.  An  Arab  was  engaged 
as  a  negotiator,  but  the  greedy  Bedouins  put  insuperable  obstacles 
in  the  way.  Another  agent  was  appointed  without  success ;  and 
finally  the  Moabites  made  an  effort  to  excite  competition  among 
the  Franks  at  Jerusalem,  among  whom  was  Captain  Warren, 
Agent  of  the  Palestine  Exploration  Society.  But,  on  hearing 
that  the  Prussian  Consul  had  already  commenced  negotiations,  de- 
signed to  secure  the  stone  for  the  Prussian  Government,  he  of  course 
di'  not  feel  at  liberty  to  concern  himself  about  it  until  the  Spring  of 
the  next  year,  when  he  learned  with  surprise  that  nothing  had  been 
done  to  get  a  "squeeze"  of  the  Stone.  Being  called  away  in 
July,  he  was  still  unable  to  take  any  action  beyond  writing  to  Eng- 
land on  the  subject. 

But  M.  Genneau,  the  French  Consul  at  Jerusalem,  suspecting 
that  the  Stone  was  one  of  great  importance,  employed  several 
agents  to  obtain  "squeezes,"  and  also  contracted  to  pay  about 
j£375  for  it,  though  it  had  previously  been  promised  to  the  Prus- 
sians for  a  far  less  sum.  As  a  consequence,  the  Moabites  became 
excited,  while  the  Governor  of  NablUs  also  desired  to  obtain  pos- 
session of  the  prize,  and  thus  secure  the  money  for  himself.  When 
therefore  M.  Genneau's  agent,  Yegaub  Caravace,  reached  the 
ground,  fighting  had  already  taken  place;  and  next  the  Moabites, 
in  their  anger,  made  a  fire  under  it,  threw  on  water,  and  so  broke 
it  up,  afterwards  distributing  the  various  fragments  among  the 
different  families  to  place  in  the  granaries,  and  serve  as  favor- 
able charms  to  win  a  blessing  upon  their  corn.  When  Cap- 
tain Warren  was  returning  to  Jerusalem,  the  following  Novem- 
ber, he  learned  the  melancholy  fact  of  its  destruction,  and  was 
presented  with  one  of  the  fragments,  by  an  Adwan,  who  brought 
the  news.  Thus  the  oldest  known  Semitic  lapidary  record  yet  dis- 
covered, after  standing  unharmed  2700  years,  was  finally  destroyed 


The  Moabite  Stone. 


11 


through  the  bad  management  of  those  who  should  have  left  the 
Prussian  Consul  to  secure  the  stone. 

The  relic  thus  fought  over  and  destroyed,  was  of  black  basalt, 
about  three  feet  five  inches  high  and  one  foot  nine  inches  in 
width  and  thickness,  rounded  both  at  top  and  bottom  to  nearly  a 
semi-circle,  notwithstanding,  Professor  Rawlinson  teaches  in  his 
Article  in  the  Contemporary  Review  (August,  1870,)  that  the 
stone  was  square  at  the  bottom.  The  inscription  consisted  of 
thirty-four  straight  lines  one  inch  and  a  fourth  apart. 


It  has  already  been  stated,  that  during  the  negotiations  to  secure 
the  stone,  M.  Genneau  secured  a  "  squeeze."  For  this  purpose 
he  sent  an  Arab  with  two  horsemen,  furnishing  him  with  the 
needed  material  to  make  the  impression.  While  the  Arab,  Yegaub 
Caravace,  was  taking  the  impression,  the  Moabites  engaged  in  a 
fight  about  the  ownership  of  the  stone,  and  consequently  the 
squeeze  was  imperfectly  done  and  saved  with  difiiculty  in  seven 
crumpled  fragments.  Captain  Warren  also  sent  his  Adwan, 
and  obtained  impressions  of  the  two  largest  fragments  of  the 
stone,  now  unfortunately  broken,  together  with  the  twelve  small 
pieces  of  the  stone  itself.  Impressions  of  other  fragments  were 
afterwards  obtained,  and  finally  the  text  was  restored  as  we  have 
seen  it  in  the  so-called  facsimiles.  The  work  of  reconstruction 
was  performed  chiefly  by  M.  Genneau,  who,  it  is  generally  con- 
ceded, has  accomplished  his  task  in  a  most  scholarly  manner, 
though  he  does  not  explain  the  particular  methods  employed.  He 
has,  since  the  outset,  issued  two  revised  texts  with  elaborate 
notes.  But,  with  all  the  study  and  care  bestowed,  the  text  is 
imperfect.  There  are  still  wanting  thirty-five  entire  words,  fifteen 
half  words  and  eighteen  letters.  Nearly  two-thirds  of  the  stone, 
consisting  of  thirty-eight  fragments,  are  in  the  possession  of  M. 
Genneau  and  the  Palestine  Exploration  Society. 

Next  we  must  speak  of  the  paleographical  character  of  the 
stone,  a  point  lately  discussed  in  the  Contemporary  Review,  by 
Professor  Rawlinson.  The  characters  used  in  the  inscription  are 
those  of  the  so-called  Phenician  tongue,  a  language  and  alphabet 
common  more  than  seven  centuries  before  Christ.  This  people,  so 
aptly  styled  the  English  of  antiquity,  exhibited  marvellous  enter- 
prise and  great  force  of  character,  appearing  equally  powerful  in 
the  marts  of  the  world's  commerce  and  on  the  well-fought  field. 


' 


^-^1 


mm 


BBfgg 


M 


il^l 


'I 


12 


Tlie  Moahite  Stone. 


The  mode  of  writing,  practiced  by  them,  had  at  this  time 
spread  a'l  over  Western  Asia,  and  become  established  in  France, 
as  we  learn,  especially  from  the  inscribed  slab  of  Marseilles.*     In 


*■  In  cnnnection  with  the  Moabite  Stono,  it  is  important  for  the  better  undcr?tnnd- 
ing  of  the  discussion,  to  give  both  the  Marseilles  and  Eshmunazer  inscriptions.  The 
latter  will  be  found  on  a  succeeding  page.  The  Marseilles  Stone  was  found  at  that  place, 
on  the  ruins  of  a  t"mple  of  Hiial,  in  1845.  The  following  is  the  translation  of  the  Rev. 
Nathan  Brown,  D.  D.,  read  by  him,  in  connection  with  a  learned  paj)cr  on  the  Pheni- 
cian  literature,  at  a  recent  meeting  of  the  New  York  Association  for  the  Advancement 
of  Science  and  Art. 

"  House  of  Raal.  These  are  the  requisitions  for  the  sacrifice  tribute,  established  for 
perpetual  observance  by  Ilalisbaal  the  Ruler,  son  of  Bodtanith,  son  of  Bod — and  Ilalis- 
baal  the  Ruler,  son  of  Bodeshmun,  son  of  Halisbaal,  and  the  associate  directors.  For  a 
bullock  offered  entire,  whether  an  oblation  or  a  whole  peace  offering,  the  priests  shall 
have  ten  shekels  of  silver  for  each  victim:  and  with  the  whole  burnt  ofl'ering  they  shall 
have  in  addition,  the  tribute  of  flesh,  three  hundred  misquals  (or  pounds);  and  with  the  ob- 
lation, grain  and  fine  flour,  as  well  as  the  skin,  viscera  and  feet;  and  the  rest  of  the  flesh 
shall  belong  to  the  owner  of  the  sacrifice.  For  a  young  bullock  that  has  horns,  but  does 
not  strike  with  the  horn  or  hoof,  and  is  not  used  for  labor,  or  for  a  stag  entire,  whether 
an  oblation  or  a  whole  peace  offering,  the  priests  shall  have  a  duty  of  five  silver  shekels, 
for  each  victim  ;  and  with  the  whole  burnt  offering  they  shall  hsv-e  in  addition  the 
tribute  of  flesh,  pounds  one  hundred  and  fifty;  and  with  the  oblation,  grain  and  fine 
flour,  as  well  as  the  skin,  viscera  and  feet,  and  the  rest  of  the  fle.ih  shall  belong  to  the 
owner  of  the  sacrifice.  For  a  ram  or  he  goat  offered  entire,  whether  an  oblation  or  a 
whole  peace  offering,  the  priest  shall  have  one  silver  shekel  and  two  gerahs  for  each  victim  ; 
and  with  the  oblation  they  shall  havn  in  addition  the  tribute  of  flesh,  thirty  pound.":, 
and  grain  and  fine  flour,  as  well  as  the  skin,  viscera  and  feet;  and  the  rest  of  the  flesh 
shall  belong  to  the  owner  of  the  sacrifice.  For  a  lamb,  or  kid,  or  fawn  of  a  stag,  offered 
entire,  whether  an  oblation  or  whole  peace  ofl'ering,  the  priests  shall  have  three-fourths 
of  a  shekel  of  silver,  and  two  gerahs  for  each  victim  ;  and  with  the  oblation  they  shall 
have  in  addition  the  tribute  of  grain  and  fine  flour,  as  well  as  the  skin,  viscera  and  feet, 
and  the  rest  of  the  flesh  belongs  to  the  owner  of  the  sacriflcn.  For  all  produce  of  the 
garden,  whether  flowers  for  a  whole  peace  offering,  or  jujubes,  or  onions,  the  priests 
shall  have  three-fourths  of  a  silver  shekel  and  two  gerahs  for  each  offering,  and  the 
peace  ofl'ering  shall  be  for  the  priests.  For  every  bird,  or  first  fruits,  or  sacrifice  of  spicesj 
or  sacrifice  of  oil,  the  priests  shall  have  two  gerahs  for  each  ofl'ering.  For  every  oblation 
offered  before  the  gods,  the  priests  shall  have  grain  and  fine  flour,  and  the  oblation.  .  , 
Upon  cakes,  and  upon  milk,  upon  lard,  and  upon  every  ofl'ering  which  men  shall  ofl'er 

there  shall  remain Of  every  ofl'ering  which  a  poor  man  shall  offer, 

whether  property  or  birds,  nothing  shall  remain  to  the  priests.  Every  leper  or  person 
with  scurvy,  and  every  murderer,  is  rejected  ;  and  every  man,  of  that  which  he  offers.  .  .  . 
The  man  of  the  congregation  shall  give  upon  each  sacrifice,  according  to  the  rate  fixed 
in  the  regulations.  The  tribute  which  he  shall  bring  is  fixed,  and  he  shall  give  according 
to  the  regulations  made  by  the  ruler  xialisbaal,  son  of  Bodtanith,  and  ilalisbaal,  son  of 
Bodeshmun,  and  the  associate  directors.  Every  priest  who  shall  exact  a  tribute  exceed- 
ing that  which  is  decreed  in  this  tablet  shall  be  punished,  and  he  shall  give  to  the  owner 
of  the  saoriflce  who  presented  it,  double  the  amount  in  silver,  of  all  the  duties  which  he 
usjustly  exacted."  See  also  "Inscription  Ph6nioienne  de  Marseilles.  Nouvelle  Inter- 
pretation. Par  M.  L.  Abb6,  J.  J.  L.  Bargfis.     Paris,  1858." 


The  Iloabite  Stone. 


13 


their  trading  voyages  tlioy  afterwards  pushed  on  to  the  shores  of 
England  and  Ireland,  where  they  left  their  mark  upon  language 
and  customs;  and  possibly  reached  America,  likewise,  at  a  time 
when  the  Northmen,  the  undoubted  Pre-Columbian  discoverers  of 
America  in  the  tenth  century,  were  still  unknown.  Unfortunately, 
in  America  the  supposed  visits  of  the  early  Phenicians  lack  monu- 
mental proof.  Yet  the  forms  of  the  letters  used  by  this  people 
Avere  the  forms  of  those  characters  through  the  medium  of  which 
Ahab  and  Elijah  may  have  corresponded,  and  in  which  Moses 
wrote  the  Pentateuch.  These  characters  are  the  same  as  those  of 
the  Eshmunazar  inscription,  which,  in  interest  if  not  in  length,  is 
the  second  in  rank  of  the  few  specimens  of  Phenician  literature 
now  extant.  Thoy  vshow  that  the  Moabites  used  the  same 
language,  though  the  Moabite  approaches  nearer  to  the  common 
Hebrew  than  the  Phenician.  Indeed,  nearly  all  the  words  on  the 
Moabite  Stone  are  found  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  Thus  the 
paleographic  character  of  the  inscription  goes  to  confirm  what 
was  demonstrated  two  centuries  ago  by  Bochart,  and  declared 
again  by  Gesenius,  long  before  the  discovery  of  the  Eshmunazar 
stone  fifteen  years  ago — namely,  that  the  Phenician  language 
was  cognate  with  the  Hebrew  of  the  Old  Testament.  It  is  hardly 
necessary  to  observe  here  that  henceforth  the  students  of  the  Phoe- 
nician tongue  will  labor  with  better  aids  and  with  a  superior  zeal. 
As  soon  as  the  contents  of  the  Moabite  Stone  became  known, 
various  scholars  hastened  to  give  interpretations,  and  crude  trans- 
lations were  sent  out  from  a  number  of  sources,  creating  no  little 
excitement  in  England,  where  they  sounded  like  a  "  page  of  the 
Bible."  These  have  been  followed  by  careful  revisions,  and,  per- 
haps, in  the  present  state  of  the  text,  all  has  been  done  that  can 
be  done  with  profit.  Any  future  emendations  of  the  present  text 
will  be  very  likely  to  prove  valueless.  We  still  need  a  perfect 
transcript  of  the  stone.  Among  those  who  have  labored  on  the 
inscription,  the  first  is  M.  Genneau.  He  was  followed  by  the 
Count  de  VogUe,  Mr.  Grove,  Emanuel  Deutch,  Captain  Warren, 
M.  Neubauer,  Professor  Schlottman,  Professor  Niildeke,  Professor 
Rawlinson  and  others.  We  will  give  here  the  work  of  Dr. 
Ginsburg,  some  of  the  parts  supplied  being  indicated  by  brackets : 


a 


^?r^. 


^^ss^ 


wm 


14 


Tnc  Moabite  Stone. 


M 

I  1 


./! 


' 


HI 


t 


1.  I  Mesha*  am  son  of  Chemoshgad  t  King  of  Moab  the 

2.  Dibonite.     My  father  J  reigned  over  Moab  thirty  years  and  I  reigned 

3.  after  my  father.    And  I  erected  this  stone  to  Chemosh  §  at  Karcha  || 
[a  stone  of] 

4.  [Sa]  Ivation,  for  he  saved  me  from  all  despoilers  and  let  me  see  my 
dcpire  upon  all  my  enemies, 

5.  and  Om[ri]  King  of  Israel   who  oppressed  Moab   many  days,  for 
Chemosh  was  angry  with  his 

6.  [la]  nd-    His  son  succeeded  him,  and  he  also  said,  I  will  oppress  Moab. 
In  my  days  he  said  [Let  us  go] 

7.  and  I  will  see  my  desire  on  him  and  his  house,  and  Israel  said,  I  shall 
destroy  it  forever.     Now  Omri  took  the  land, 

8.  Medebal]  and  occupied  it  [he  and  his  son  and  his  son's]  son,  forty 
years.     And  Chemosh  [had  mercy] 

9.  on  it  in  my  days ;  and  I  built  Baal-meon,**  and  made  there  in  the  ditch 
and  I  [built] 

10.  Kirjathaim,tt  for  the  men  of  Gad  dwelled  in  the  land  [Atar]oth  from 
of  old  and  the  K  [ing  of  I]  srael  fortified 

11.  A  [t]aroth,JJ  and  I  assaulted  the  wall  and  captured  it,  and  killed  all 
the  wa[rriors  of] 

12.  the  wall,  for  the  well  pleasing  of  Chemosh  and  Moab  ;  and  I  removed 
from  it  all  the  spoils  and  [of- 

13.  fered]  it  before  Chemosh  in  Kirjath ;  and  I  placed  therein  the  men 
of  Siran  and  the  me[n  of  Zerath] 

14.  Shacher.g^    And  Chemosh  said  to  me,  go  take  Nebo|||l  against  Israel. 
[And  I] 


*  A  great  desire  has  been  shown  by  critics  to  exercise  their  ingenuity  on  the  text  of 
Mesha's  inscription  ;  and  all  has  perhaps  been  already  done  that  can  be  expected  with- 
out a  more  careful  rendering  of  the  text.  And  while  the  general  sense  of  the  document 
is  clear,  we  can  with  the  more  equanimity  abstain  from  guessing,  until  we  have  a  fac- 
simile that  will  give  every  possible  fragment  that  has  thus  far  eluded  the  explorers.  The 
writer  will  only  allude  to  such  points  as  may  seem  to  require  remark  from  the  very 
nature  and  purpose  of  this  article.  For  instance  the  custom  of  setting  up  memorial 
stones  like  these  is  referred  to  in  1  Sam.  vii.  12;  and  2  Sam.  viii.  13. 

f  The  lacuna  after  Chemosh  in  the  inscription  has  been  filled  up  by  Gnd,  fortune,  which 
appears  to  be  accepted  as  the  true  reaiing.  Thus  it  signifies  whose  fortune  is  Chemosh. 
It  is  analogous  to  liaaUjad,    (Joshua  xi.  17). 

X  It  appears  from  this  that  Mesha's  father  was  not  a  king. 

§  Evidently  done  as  a  pious  act  to  Chemosh.  The  habit  of  religious  thought  on  the 
part  of  the  Moabite  appears  identical  with  that  of  the  Jew,  except  as  regards  its  object, 
which  was  Chemosh,  on  whom — see  Num.  xxi,  2U;  Judges  xi.  2\;  Jer.  xlviii.  7,  13,  46. 

II  A  suburb  of  Dibon. 

f  Medcba,  a  Moabite  city  east  of  Jordan  where  the  Amorites  fought  Joab. 

**  The  present  Maein,  a  ruin  south-east  of  Heshbon. 

ft  About  two  hours  from  Baal-Meon. 

\X  A  city  of  Gad.    Num.  xxx.  11,  34. 

g^  See  Joshua  xiii.  19. 

II |{  Named  from  its  proximity  to  the  mount  from  which  Moses  saw  the  Promised  land. 


The  Moabite  Stone. 


15 


15.  AVent  in  the  night,  and  I  fought  against  it  from  the  break  of  dawn 
till  noon,  and  I  took 

16.  it  and  slew  in  all  seven  thousand  [men]  but  I  did  not  kill  the  women 

17.  and  maidens,  for  [IJ  devoted  them  to  AshtarChemosh  *;  and  I  took, 
from  it 

18.  [the  ves]  sels  of  Jehovah  and  offered  them  before  Chemosh.    A  King 
of  Israel  forti[fied] 

19.  Jahaz,  and  occupied  it,  when  he  made  war  against  me ;  and  Chemosh 
drove  him  out  before  [me  and] 

20.  I  took  from  Moab  two  hundred  men,  all  chiefs,  and  fought  against 
Jahaz  and  took  it, 

21.  in  addition  to  Dibon.    I  built  Karcha,  the  wall  of  the  forest,  and  the 
wall 

22.  of  the  city,  and  I  built  the  gates  thereof,  and  I  built  the  towers  thereof, 
and  I  built  the  palace,  and  I  made  the  prison.^  f  of  the  men  of    ...     . 

.     .     .     .     with  [in  the] 

24.  wa'l.    And  there  was  no  cistern  within  the  wall  in   Karcha,  %  and  I 
said  to  all  the  people  make  for  yourselves 

25.  every  man  a  cistern  |  in  his  house.     And  I  dug  the  ditch  ||  for  Karcha 
with  the  [chosen]  men  of 

26.  [IJsrael.     I  built  Aroer  and  I  made  the  road  ^  across  the  Arnon, 

27.  I  built  Beth-Bamoth,**  for  it  was  destroyed  ;  I  built  Bezer,  for  it  was 
cu[t  down] 

28.  by  the  fifty  men  of  Dibon,  for  all  Dibon  was  now  loyal ;  and  I  sav[ed] 

29.  [from  my  enemies]  Bikran,  which  I  added  to  my  land,  and  I  built] 

30.  [Beth-Gamul],  and   Beth-Diblathaim,  and    Beth-Baal-Meon,  and  I 
placed  there  the  Mo[abites] 

31.  [to  take  possession  of  ]    the  land.    And  Horonaim    .    .    .    dwelt 
therein 

32.  And  Chemosh  said  to  me,  go  down  and  make  war  against  Horonaim 
and  ta[ke]  it 

33.  Chemosh  in  my  days 

34.  year and  I 


*  Schlottman  considers  this  name  impor.ant  in  connection  with  Canaanite  mythology, 
as  the  original  of  the  Aphrodite  of  Aristophanes. 

f  Here  we  are  reminded  of  the  sad  fact  that  the  prison  is  almost  always  the  accompa- 
niment of  the  palace. 

X  A  suburb  of  Dibon. 

g  The  place  was  probably  honey-combed,  like  Jerusalem,  with  vats  sunk  in  the  rock. 

II  This  phrase,  "  dug  the  dit.-jh "  is  elsewhere  translated,  "  decreed  the  separation." 
Schlottman  favors  the  view  that  it  refers  to  a  covenant  made  by  Mesha  with  his  god 
Chemosh  to  remain  forever  in  a  state  of  non-communion  as  regards  the  Jews. 

\  Burckhardt  mentions  ruins  opposite  Ar*ir-Aroer  called  Mehadetel  Haj  which  occupy 
iwo  hours  in  passing  through  them.  Near  by  are  the  ruins  of  the  Roman  bridge,  proba- 
bly based  on  the  work  of  Mesba,  which  was  evidently  a  work  of  great  magnitude. 

**  Bamoth,  that  perhupa  of  Numbers  xxi.  19. 


«<Mh 


^ITJBWWJ 


16 


The  3Ioabite  Stone. 


hi: 


I 


.  Now  it  will  readily  be  ^seen  that  this  inscription  records  three 
events  in  the  reign  of  Mesha,  King  of  the  Moabites.  First,  the 
wars  of  Mesha  with  Omri,  King  of  Israel ;  second,  the  celebration 
of  the  public  works  undertaken  by  Mesha  after  his  deliverance 
from  his  Jewish  oppressors ;  third,  his  successful  wars  against 
lloronaim,  undertaken  at  the  command  of  Chemosh. 

But  who  was  Mesha  ? 

In  order  to  understand  his  relation  to  this  stone  and  to  his  age 
we  must  turn  to  the  secon<l  Book  of  the  Kings,  where  Mesha, 
King,  of  the  Moabites,  is  the  subject  of  a  few  verses,  at  the  end  of 
which  he  drops  out  of  the  history,  and  is  seen  no  more,  disappear- 
ing in  a  more  histrionic  way  even  than  that  in  which  he  was  intro- 
duced.    The  account  says : 

"And  Mesha  king  of  Moab  was  a  sheepmaster,  and  rendered  unto  the 
king  of  Israel  an  hundred  thousand  lambs,  and  an  hundred  thousand  rams, 
with  the  wool.  But  it  came  to  pass,  when  Ahab  was  dead,  that  the  king  of 
Moab  rebelled  against  the  king  ot  Israel. 

And  king  Jehoram  went  out  of  Samaria  the  same  time,  and  numbered  all 
Israel.  And  he  went,  and  sent  to  .Fehoshaphat  the  king  of  Judah,  saying, 
'l"he  king  of  Moab  hath  rebelled  against  me:  wilt  thou  go  with  me  against 
i\Ioab  to  battle?  And  he  said,  I  will  go  up  :  I  am  as  thou  art,  my  people  as 
thy  people,  ami  my  horses  as  thy  horses.  And  he  said,  VVhich  way  shull  we 
go  up?  And  he  answered.  The  way  through  the  wilderness  of  Edom.  So 
the  king  of  Israel  went,  and  the  king  of  Judah,  .and  the  king  of  Kdom  :  and 
they  fetched  a  compass  of  seven  days'  jonrney  :  and  there  was  no  water  for 
the  host,  and  for  the  cattle  that  followed  thetn.  And  the  king  of  Israel  sa'd, 
AliisI  that  the  Loud  hath  called  these  three  kings  together,  to  deliver  them 
into  the  hand  of  Moab  !  But  Jehoshaphat  said,  Is  flwre  not  hero  a  prophet 
of  the  Lord,  that  we  may  inquire  of  the  Lord  by  him?  And  one  of  the 
king  of  Israel's  servants  answered  and  said,  Here  is  Elisha,  the  son  of  Sha- 
phat,  which  poured  water  on  the  hands  of  Elijah.  And  Jehoshaphat  said. 
The  word  of  the  Loiin  is  with  him.  So  the  king  of  Israel  and  Jehoshaphat 
and  the  king  of  Edom  went  down  to  him.  And  Elisha  said  unto  the  king  of 
Israel,  What  have  I  to  do  with  thee?  get  thee  to  the  prophets  of  thy  father, 
and  to  the  prophets  of  thy  mother.  And  the  king  of  Israel  said  unto  liim : 
Nay:  for  the  Loud  hath  called  these  three  kings  together,  to  deliver  them 
into  the  hand  of  Moab.  And  Elisha  said,  Ak  the  Lord  of  hosts  livptb,  be- 
fore whom  I  stand,  surely,  were  it  not  that  I  regard  the  presence  of  Jf»ho- 
shaphat  the  king  of  Judah,  I  would  not  look  toward  thee,  nor  see  thee.  But 
now  bring  me  a  minstrel.  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  the  minstrel  played, 
that  the  hand  of  the  LoiU)  came  upon  him.  And  he  said,  Thus  saitli  the 
Lord,  Make  this  valley  full  of  ditches.  For  thus  saith  the  Loitn,  Ve  sluill 
not  see  win  I,  neither  t-hall  ye  see  rain  ;  yet  that  valley  shall  be  filled  with 
water,  that  ye  may  drink  both  ye,  and  your  cattle,  and  your  beasts.  And 
this  is  but  a  light  tiling  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord:  He  will  deliver  ihe 
Moabites  also  into  your  hand.  Ami  ye  shall  smite  every  fenced  city,  and 
every  choice  city,  and  shall  fell  every  good  tree,  and  stop  all  wells  of  water, 
and  mar  every  good  piece  of  land  with  stones.  And  it  came  to  pass  in  the 
morning,  when  the  meat  offering  was  offered,  that,  behold,  there  came  water 
by  the  way  of  Edom,  and  the  country  was  filled  with  water. 

And  when  all  the  Moabites  heard  that  the  kings  were  come  up  to  fight 


The  Moahite  Stone. 


17 


against  them,  they  gathered  all  that  were  able  to  put  on  armour,  and  upward, 
and  stood  in  the  border.  And  they  rose  up  early  in  the  morning,  and  the 
sun  shone  upon  the  water,  and  tlie  Moabites  saw  the  water  on  the  other  side 
as  red  as  blood:  And  they  said,  this  /»  blood  :  the  kings  are  surely  slain, 
and  they  have  smitten  one  another  :  now  therefore,  Moab,  to  the  spoil.  And 
when  they  came  to  the  camp  of  Israel,  the  Israelites  rose  up  and  smote  the 
Moabites,  so  that  they  flea  before  them  :  but  they  went  forward  smiting 
the  Moabites,  even  in  their  country.  And  they  beat  down  their  cities,  and 
on  every  good  piece  of  land  cast  every  man  his  stone,  and  filled  it ;  and  they 
stop])ed  ail  the  wells  of  water,  and  felled  all  the  ^cod  trees  :  only  in  Kir- 
haraseth  left  they  the  stones  thereof;  howbeit  the  slingers  went  about /<, 
and  smote  it. 

And  when  the  king  of  Moab  saw  that  the  battle  was  too  sore  for  him,  he 
took  witli  him  seven  hundred  men  that  drew  swords,  to  break  througli  even 
unto  the  king  of  Edom  :  but  they  could  not.  Then  he  took  his  eldest  son 
that  should  have  reigned  in  his  stead,  end  offered  him  /or  a  burnt  ottering 
upon  the  wall.  And  there  wan  great  indignation  against  Israel:  and  they 
departed  from  him,  and  returned  to  their  own  land."* 

And  thus,  with  a  fearful  tragedy,  Mesha  the  sheep-master  dis- 
appeared, to  come  forth  again  before  the  world  after  the  lapse  of 
ages,  through  the  medium  of  a  long-neglected  stone,  erected  by 
Mesha  himself,  as  a  monument  and  religious  testimonial. 

The  inscription  upon  this  monument.  Dr.  Ginsburg  maintains, 
is  referable  to  the  event  above  described  in  the  sacred  narrative ; 
while  he  thinks  the  story  is  told  with  less  difference  than  usually 
appears  in  the  accounts  of  two  hostile  parties  both  of  whom  are 
describing  the  same  thing.  It  is  true,  that  Mesha  on  his  monu- 
ment says  nothing  about  the  humiliating  fact  that  he  was  obliged 
to  pay  tribute  to  the  king  of  Israel,  yet  he  confesses  that  he  was 
oppressed  forty  years  by  Omri.  So  likewise  he  thinks  we  have  a 
recognition  of  the  three  kings  who  fought  against  him,  in  the  state- 
ment that  Chemosh  delivered  Mesha  "from  all  his  enemies,"  and,  as 
he  immediately  adds,  from  "Omri,  king  ot  Israel."  This  is,  pos- 
sibly, an  undesigned  coincidence. 

Mesha  also,  as  Dr.  Ginsburg  observes,  would  not  be  likely  to 
record  the  blunder  alluded  to  in  the  Book  of  the  Kings,  namely, 
that  of  mistaking  water  for  blood, f  a  misapprehension  that 
leil  to  the  destruction  of  his  army.  The  great  event  recorded  is  that 
of  his  final  defeat  of  Omri  and  his  allies,  which  he  claims  is  practi- 
cally conceded  in  the  end  of  the  27th  verse,  where  after  stating 
that  Mesha  sacrificed  his  only  son  for  "  a  burnt  offiering  upon  the 


»  2  Kings  iii.  4—27. 

t  The  cause  of  this  blunder,  of  course,  was  the  ditches  during  the  night  and  filled  with 
water  from  the  neighboring  elevations. 


•OTiamBoiiinaWqa 


I : 


18 


The  Moahite  Stone. 


wall,"  it  is  added,  "And  there  '•  13  great  indignation  against 
Israel:  and  they  departed  from  i  m  [Mesha]  and  returned  to 
their  own  land."  This  was  simply  the  euphemistic  way  of  saying 
that  Omri  was  finally  defeated.  The  sacrifice  of  Mesha's  son  ap- 
pears to  have  kindled  such  a  degr'ie  of  1/lind  enthusiasm  on  the 
part  of  his  soldiers,  that  Omri's  men  could  not  stand  before  them, 
and  therefore,  beat  a  retreat.  Josephus  saw  that  this  was  so,  and 
in  paraphrasing  the  account  of  the  sacred  writer,  lets  down  the 
national  pride  as  gently  as  possible,  saying  that  the  allied  kings 
withdrew  on  account  of  the  terrible  distress  which  they  had  crea- 
ted, and  that  they  "  were  so  aff'ected,  in  the  way  of  humanity  and 
pity,  that  they  raised  the  siege."*  Yet  the  Divine  Word  stands, 
and  tells  us  that  they  departed,  because  there  was  "  great  indig- 
nation against  Israel !"  While  the  Jews  at  times,  could  be  over- 
come hy  fef  ■'.  they  were  never  driven  from  an  enemy's  country  by 
pity.  Cleaiiy,  the  Moabites  were  the  more  powerful  of  the  two 
parties  then  in  the  field,  and,  eventually,  as  the  Scriptures  con- 
cede, and  as  Mesha  proclaimed  upon  the  stone,  if  he  refers  to  this 
event,  they  recovered  from  their  disasters,  and,,  in  an  hour  of  lofty 
enthusiasm  inspired  by  the  great  sacrifice  of  the  king,  drove 
the  invaders  from  their  land  ;  a  land  which  Omri,  single-handed, 
did  not  dare  even  to  approach,  and  which,  aided  by  the  two  kings, 
he  finally  entered  trembling,  and  by  stealth.  Therefore,  Dr.  Gins- 
burg  holds  that  the  Moabite  stone  refers  to  the  same  event  detailed 
in  the  Sacred  narrative. f 

Still,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  maintained  that  this  account  by 
Mesha  had  reference  to  another  part  of  Jewish  history,  mentioned 
in  2  Kings  i.  1 :  "Then  Moab  rebelled  against  Israel,  after  the 
death  of  Ahab."  The  account  in  2  Kings  iii.,  is  referred  to  the 
punishment  of  this  rebellion.  This  is  the  view  of  Count  Voglie, 
of  Schlottman,  and  Rawlinson,  who  hold  that  the  Moabite  stone 
was  erected  in  the  reign  of  Ahaziah,  king  of  Israel,  and  about 
896—894  B.  C,  while  Dr.  Ginsburg  fixes  its  date  at  884  B.  C, 


«  Antiquitiet,  B.  IV.  C.  iii.  S.  2. 

f  The  writer  in  Smith's  Dictionary  hardly  knows  what  to  say  on  this  point;  and,  af- 
ter speaking  of  the  sacrifice  of  Mesha's  son,  gets  away  with  the  irrelevant,  and,  under  the 
circumstances,  almost  unmeaning  remark,  that  "  Mesha  had  no  one  like  Balaam  at  hand, 
to  oounsel  patience  and  submission  to  a  mightier  power  than  Chemogh  or  Baal-Peor.'' 


"••      f-. 


h- 


The  Moahite  Stone. 


19 


the  first  year  of  Jehu's  reign.     It  is,  therefore,  chiefly  a  question 
in  regard  to  da^'^s. 

Another  writer,  whose  vieAvs  are  entitled  to  a  respectful  hear- 
ing, maintains  that  the  pillar  was  "  set  up  either  in  the  last  year 
of  Ahaziah's  reign,  or  in  the  first  year  of  Jehoram's,  to  commem- 
orate Mesha's  successful  invasion  of  Reubenite  territory  during 
the  two  years  that  elapsed  from  the  death  of  Ahab  to  the  acces- 
sion of  Jehoram ;  and  further,  "that  the  biblical  narrative  in  2 
Kings  iii.  refers  to  transactions  subsequent  to  that  invasion,  and 
entirely  different  from  anything  recorded  on  the  stone."*  He  then 
goes  on  to  argue  that  the  Moabite  Stone  localizes  Mesha's  exploits 
north  of  the  Arnon,  while  the  account  in  2  Kings  iii.  puts  it  south 
of  the  Arnon.  He  likewise  urges  the  fact  that  the  Biblical  account 
has  three  kings,  while  Mesha  refers  to  but  one,  though  this  is  a  point, 
met  in  his  own  way,  by  Dr.  Ginsburg,  as  we  have  already  seen. 
The  reviewer  says  also  that  Mesha  writes  of  his  successful  invasion 
of  the  enemy's  territory,  while  the  Biblical  account  is  one  of  three 
kings  "beating  down  the  cities"  of  Moab.  He  also  considers  it 
"incredible"  that  Mesha  should  have  " maue  no  allusion  to  the 
sacrifice  of  his  only  son,  which  took  place  upon  the  walls  of  Kir- 
haraseth."  Yet  we  must  confess  that  we  see  nothing  so  incredible 
in  this.  Further,  what  the  writer  says  in  regard  to  the  localizing 
of  the  events  does  not  appear  unanswerable,  while  we  think  that 
he  does  not  fairly  invalidate  Dr.  Ginsburg's  remark  that 

"  The  differences  between  the  two  narratives  are  auch  as  might  be  expected 
in  two  records  of  the  same  events  emanating  from  two  hostile  parties;  and 
are  far  less  striking  than  the  conflicting  descriptions  given  by  the  Engli.sh 
and  French  of  the  battle  of  Waterloo ;  by  the  English,  French  and  Kus- 
sians  of  the  capture  of  Sebastopol ;  by  the  Prussians  and  Austrians  of  the 
battle  of  Sadowa,  or  by  the  French  and  Germans  of  the  battle  of  Worth." 

Dr.  Ginsburg's  critic  seems  to  suggest  a  real  difiiculty  in  regard 
to  his  own  theory,  which  allows  only  two  years  for  the  achieve- 
ments of  Mesha,  including  the  erection  of  the  great  bridge  over 
the  Arnon,  the  remains  of  which  even  now  tell  us  something  of 
the  magnitude  of  the  enterprise. 

The  work  accomplished  was  really  great.  There  were  numer- 
ous battles  and  sieges ;  the  capture  of  about  a  dozen  walled  cities, 
and  their  subsequent  rebuilding  and  fortification ;  the  restoration 


*  Princeton  Review,  April,  1871,  p.  225. 

2 


i ' 


20 


The  Moabite  Stone. 


I  I 


I    .  1 


I     t 
I     . 


i  ! 


of  Karcha,  with  its  fortifications,  gates,  towers,  palace,  prisons  and 
water-works ;  and,  perhaps,  above  all,  the  road  and  bridge  across 
the  Arnon.  A  careful  examination  of  Mesha's  account  seems  to 
indicate,  that  a  large  portion  of  the  work  was  of  a  character  that 
demanded  a  long  time  for  its  completion.  Besides  this,  much  of 
the  work  appears  to  have  been  of  a  kind  that  would  not  have  been 
undertaken  during  the  supposed  brief  period  of  two  years,  which, 
if  the  supposition  be  true,  was  a  period  filled  by  apprehension  and 
anxiety,  even  when  not  actually  resounding  with  the  din  of  war. 
When  Ave  subtract  from  the  two  years  the  time  actually  expended 
in  the  campaigns,  when  everything  hung  in  the  scales,  how  much 
time  will  be  left  for  the  completion  of  the  many  extensive  works, 
the  very  nature  of  which  points  to  a  period  of  lengthened  leisure. 
To  account  for  the  supposed  rapidity  of  Mesha's  victories  by  the 
'*  royal  slackness  or  the  military  feebleness  of  king  Ahaziah," 
and  to  suppose  that  Mesha's  fear  of  the  return  of  his  enemy, 
strengthened  by  "powerful  allies,"  caused  him  to  hasten  these 
great  public  works,  really  seems  quite  as  gratuitous  as  the  decla- 
ration, that  the  building  of  the  bridge  over  the  Arnon,  "  was 
clearly  vital  to  the  security  of  his  conquests."  On  the  whole, 
therefore,  it  would  appear,  that  Dr.  Ginsburg's  view  is  quite  as  rea- 
sonable as  that  of  his  critic. 

Still  it  is  not  now  the  design  of  the  writer  to  argue  either  of  the 
two  positions  as  regards  the  date  of  the  Moabite  Stone,  even 
though  this  might  safely  be  done,  for  the  reason  that  no  amount 
of  proper  discussion  could  for  one  moment  obscure  the  great  fact 
concerning  which  all  agree,  namely,  the  fact  that  the  Stone 
sheds  substantial  light  upon  the  Biblical  narrative.  To  this  phase 
of  the  subject  let  us,  therefore,  turn.  But  as  preliminary,  how- 
ever, we  may  first  quote  a  passage  from  Dr.  Ginsburg,  who  says : 

"  The  historical  importance  of  the  *  Moabite  Stone '  to  the  Bible  narrative 
will  be  apparent  when  we  consider  the  fragmentary  record  of  the  relation- 
ship subsisting  between  the  Hebrews  and  the  Moabites  as  given  in  the  Old 
Testament.  The  Biblical  history  of  Moab  before  the  establishment  of  the 
Monarchy  among  the  Jews,  is  beyond  the  scope  of  our  investigation.  Da- 
vid, the  second  king  of  the  Israelites,  who  himself  was  of  Moabite  descent, 
and  who  committed  his  parents  to  the  care  of  the  king  of  Moab  (1  Sam.  xxii. 
3-5),  for  some  reason  which  has  hitherto  defied  all  the  powers  of  divining,  and 
which  may  perhaps  be  explained  by  the  discovery  of  another  Moabite  Stone, 
we  are  abruptly  told  waged  a  most  bloody  war  against  the  king  who  had 


Uv 


The  Moahite  Stone. 


21 


aflbrdeil  protection  to  those  so  near  and  dear  to  him  (2  Sam.  vlii.  2,  11,  12: 
1  Cliroii.  xviii.  2, 11).  We  are  told  tiie  result  of  tliis  war  was,  that  this  shep- 
herd king  massacred  two-thirds  of  the  Moabites  and  despoiled  and  made 
tributary  the  remainder.  Apart  from  the  incidental  remark,  that  some  of 
Solomon's  foreign  wives  were  Moabites,  and  that  Chemosh,  the  Moabite 
god  was  worshiped  in  Jerusalem  (1  Kings  xi.  1,  7,  33 :  2  Kings  xxiii.  13), 
we  hear  nothing  of  the  relationship  of  Moab  to  the  kingdom  of  Israel  for 
about  eighty  years,  when  we  are  suddenly  informed,  that  upon  the  death  of 
Ahab,  they  revolted,  to  rid  themselves  of  a  grinding  tribute  (2  Kiiii^s  ill.  4, 
&c,)  Hence,  it  has  generally  been  concluded,  that  the  awful  carnage  in- 
flicted upon  them  by  David  .  .  .  had  so  crippled  and  cowed  the  survivors, 
who  were  reduced  to  vassalage,  that  they  continued  after  the  disruption  of 
the  kingdom  to  be  tributary  lo  Israel  up  to  the  reign  of  Jehoram,  when  they 
revolted,  refusing  to  pay  the  enormous  contribution  heretofore  demanded." 

But  from  the  Moabite  Stone  (line  5)  we  receive  additional  in- 
formation, and  discover  the  fact,  tliat  the  Moabites  were  free  from 
Jewish  bondage  down  to  the  year  924  B.  C,  when  they  were  re- 
conquered by  Omri.  It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  the  Moabites 
must  have  taken  advantage  of  the  public  distractions  in  the  time 
of  King  Jeroboam  I.  (975  B.  C.)  to  obtain  their  liberty,  or  that 
this  liberty  was  freely  granted  as  a  favor  by  Solomon.  Dr.  Gins- 
burg  and  Professor  Schlottman  incline  to  the  latter  view,  which  is 
extremely  reasonable. 

First  of  all,  Solomon  himself  was,  in  part,  of  Moabite  origin. 
Again,  we  find,  that  he  was  under  peculiar  obligation  to  the 
Moabites,  for  the  reason  that  his  father,  David,  had,  in  a  time  of 
public  distress,  freely  confided  his  grand-parents  to  their  care. 
We  ?ead: 

"And  David  went  thence  to  Mizpeh  of  Moab :  and  he  said  unto 
the  king  of  Moab,  Let  my  father  and  my  mother,  I  pray  thee, 
come  forth,  and  be  with  you,  till  I  know  what  God  will  do  for  me. 
And  he  brought  them  before  the  king  of  Moab;  and  they  dwelt 
with  him  all  the  while  that  David  was  in  the  hold."  (1  Sam.  xxii.  3.) 

Then,  likewise,  we  learn,  that  Solomon's  father  waged  a  ter- 
rible war  against  the  Moabites,  without,  so  far  as  we  know,  any 
just  cause.  Here,  then,  may  have  been  an  opportunity  for  an  act 
of  reparation  to  an  injured  people.  Besides  all  this,  Solomon  had 
a  number  of  Moabitish  wives,  who  exercised  a  great  and  even 
baneful  influence,  being  suflSciently  powerful  to  draw  him  away,  at 
times,  to  the  worship  of  their  own  gods.  We  read — "  Then  did 
Solomon   build   a  high   place   for  Chemosh,  the  abomination  of 


if 


22 


TJie  Moahite  Stone. 


I  ! 


IM 


51 


Moab,  in  the  liill  that  is  l)pforo  Jerusalem."  (1  Kings  xi.  7).* 
And  the  people  wlio  were  thus  successful  in  securing  high  honor 
to  their  gods,  could  scarcely  have  neglected  to  use  their  influence 
in  behalf  of  their  kindreil  and  country.  It  is,  therefore,  highly 
reasonable  to  suppose,  that  Solomon  improved  the  occasioji  to 
cancel  his  ancient  obligations  while  gratifying  the  pride  of  his  fa- 
vorites. But  however  the  Moabites  may  have  gained  their  liberty, 
we  know  from  the  Pillar  of  Mesha,  that  dovn  to  the  year  !>24  B. 
G.,  they  were  free,  which  is  a  fact  that  we  did  not  know  before. 

The  declaration  that  Omri  reconquered  Moab  at  the  above  dates 
and  that  Mesha  afterwards  delivered  his  people  by  force  of  arms, 
e.xplains  other  points. 

Now  from  the  year  of  the  invasion  of  Moab  by  the  Kings  of 
Israel,  Judali  and  Edom  (the  narrative  of  which  has  already  been 
given  from  2  Kings,  iii.)  down  to  the  death  of  Ahaz,  a  period  of 
about  one  hundred  and  eighty  years,  we  hear  nothing  of  the  rela- 
tion of  Moab  to  Israel.  And  yet  we  know  that  the  Moabites  were 
actually  masters  of  the  country,  not  only  south,  but  north  of  the 
Arnon,  occupying  that  region  whicli  the  Amorites  originally 
wrested  from  them,  but  which  the  Jews,  in  turn,  conquered  from 
the  Amorites,  and  assigned  to  Reuben,  Gad  and  the  half  tribe  of 
Manasseh.  How,  then,  did  the  Moabites  reconquer  the  territory 
from  the  two  and  a  half  tribes,  and  rise  to  that  condition  of 
wealth  and  power  described  by  Isaiah,  where,  in  his  Burden  of 
Moab,  he  presents  a  great  and  warlike  people,  abounding  in  "  armed 
soldiers,"  with  wealth  "laid  up,"  "summer  fruits,''  and  harvests, 
"vineyards,"  "gladness"  and  "  joy  out  of  the  plentiful  field," 
the  "shouting"  treaders  of  the  purple  vintage,  the  high  altars  of 
Chemosh  with  their  gorgeous  ritual  performed  in  an  atmosphere 
faint  with  the  fragrance  of  the  aromatics  of  the  East,  and,  above 
all,  the  "  haughtiness"  and  "  the  pride  of  Moab,"  ruling  in  as- 
sured safety,  "  from  Sela  to  the  wilderness,  unto  the  mount  of  the 
daughter  of  Zion"?  (Isaiah  xv.  16.)  When  we  ask,  and  how  did 
the  Moabites  attain  to  a  position  of  such  ease,  splendor  and 
strength  ? 


^  It  was  king  Josiah'g  mission  to  destroy  these  high  places:  "And  the  high  places 
that  icere  before  Jerusalem,  which  were  on  the  right  band  of  the  mount  of  corruption, 
which  Solomon  the  king  of  Israel  had  builded  for  Ashtoreth  the  abomination  of  the  Zi- 
doniaiis,  and  for  Chemosh  the  abomination  of  the  Moabites,  and  for  Milcom  the  abomi- 
nation of  the  children  of  Ammon  did  the  king  defile."    2  Kings  xxiii.  13. 


;  :; 


The  MonhUe  Stone, 


23 


It  is  not  neccssfiry  to  dwell  upon  tlio  answers  that  have  boon 
pivon  in  tinioa  past,  which  suppose  that  during  the  intorron;iiuin 
following  the  death  of  Jeroboam  II.  (TOy — 21  B.  C.)  they  rooov- 
ercd  their  cities,  a  task  rondorod  all  the  more  easy  by  the  carry- 
ing away  of  Reuben  to  Assyria,  which  was  begun  by  Pul  (770  ]}.  C.) 
and  completed  by  Ti'glath-pileser.  If  such  an  invasion  had  been 
performed  at  the  time  referred  to,  we  should  probably  have  found 
it  enumerated  by  Isaiah  in  the  "  Burden"  witli  the  rest  of  the  sins 
of  Moab. 

But  the  Triumphal  Pillar  of  Dibon  explains  this  point,  and  shows 
U8  that  it  was  Mesha  who  reconquered  the  territory  about  884 
B.  C,  and  rebuilt  the  cities  which  Israel  had  originally  taken  from 
his  nation  by  Omri  *J34  B.  C.  And  the  country  thus  taken  from  the 
Jewish  transjordanic  tribes  remained  in  possession  of  the  Moabites 
down  to  726  B.  C,  when  the  claims  of  the  cot  queror  had  been 
recognized  and  when  they  had  risen  to  the  proud  and  prosperous 
condition  described  by  the  Seer  in  the  Burden  of  Moab.  Thus 
this  remarkable  stone,  after  standing  silent  in  the  desert  for  so 
many  ages,  is  brought  forward  to  cry  out  against  the  guesses  and 
surmises  of  the  well-meaning  but  misled  antiquary. 

Another  fact  is  also  clear,  namely,  that  after  achieving  these 
victories  and  restoring  the  cities,  he  made  Dibon  the  capital  of 
his  Kingdom. 

The  historical  information  given  by  this  stone  is  important,  if 
not  extensive,  and  at  the  same  time  it  forms  so  much  contempora- 
neous testimony  to  the  historical  basis  of  the  Old  Testament,  which 
is  no  longer  a  solitary  book,  speaking  in  unparalleled  and  unsup- 
ported language  out  of  the  dim  past.  The  composition  of  Mesha 
written  in  the  characters  employed  at  the  time,  not  only  in  Phoeni- 
cia, but  in  Jerusalem  and  Samaria,  is  older  than  two  thirds  of  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures,  as  old  as  the  closing  days  of  Elijah,  and  with- 
in a  century  of  the  age  of  Solomon's  Temple,  the  foundation  of 
which  still  remains,  after  a  lapse  of  two  thousand  eight  hundred 
years.  Skeptical  criticism  which  would  question  the  antiquity  of 
the  Hebrew  oracles,  is  therefore  rebuked,  and  its  vaunted  a  priori 
arguments  dismissed  to  the  winds,  by  this  new  and  remarkable 
monument,  which  in  addition  to  other  advantages,  gives  the  names 
of  twelve  places  me.:tioned  in  Numbers,  the  forty-eighth  chapter 
of  Jeremiah  alone  containing  ten. 


r^ 


/ 


I'  i''. 


1 


' 


24 


The  MoaUte  Stone. 


But  we  must  turn  from  this  aspect  of  the  Moabite  stone,  to 
glance  at  its  theological  importance.  We  find  that,  after  the  cap 
turc  of  Nebo,  Mesha  says  (line  18):  "  I  took  from  it  the  vessels  of 
Jehovah  and  offered  them  before  Chemosh."  This  simple  sentence 
sheds  light  upon  a  hitherto  uncertain  question,  for  it  indicates  that 
the  transjordariic  tribes  of  the  Jews  had  a  separate  service  and  ritual 
of  their  own.  This  has  hitherto  been  regarded  as  matter  of  tradi- 
tion. It  is  true  that  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  (xv.  21)  tell  us  how 
"  Moses  of  old  time  hath  in  every  city  them  that  preach  him,  being 
read  in  the  synagogues  every  sabbath  day,"  while  Josephus  {cont. 
Apion)  says  that  Moses  permitted  the  people  in  general  "  to  leave 
oft"  their  employments,  and  to  assemble  together  for  the  hearing  of 
the  law  and  learning  it  exactly,  and  this  not  once  or  twice  or 
oftener,  but  every  week."  (B.  II.  S.  18.)  Yet  such  exercises 
did  not  imply  any  ceremonial  service,  at  least  a  service  of  a  high 
order.  This  required  an  elaborate  ritual,  with  altars,  bowls,  sacri- 
ficial vessels  and  musical  instruments.  Consecrated  apparatus  like 
this  appears  to  have  been  possessed  by  the  people  of  Nebo,  and 
these  "  vessels  of  Jehovah,"  Mesha  took  at  the  capture  and  oflfered 
them  before  his  god  Chemosh.  How  long  the  worship  at  Nebo 
had  been  established,  and  whether  their  ritual  was  that  of  the 
ancient  Tabernacle  or  of  the  more  recent  order  of  the  Temple,  we 
cmnot  say.  Yet  it  is  clear  that  they  had  a  worship  of  a  superior 
character,  which  is  a  fact  that  we  learn  exclusively  from  the  Moa- 
bite Stone. 

We  are  also  taught  by  this  stone  that  in  the  days  of  Mesha  the 
Tetragrammaton  was  used,  for  we  have  the  name  Jehovah  in  the 
inscription,  which  incommunicable  name  could  be  uttered  by  the 
High  Priest  alone,  in  the  Benediction  on  the  great  day  of  Atone- 
ment, in  confessing  the  sins  of  the  nation.  When  the  priests  and 
people  in  the  outer  court  heard  it,  they  fell  upon  their  faces,  and 
exclaimed,  "  Blessed  be  the  name  of  His  glorious  majesty  forever 
and  ever."  And  every  student  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  is  fami- 
liar with  the  fact  that  TV\TV  (Jehovah)  is  pointed  HliT,  or  with  the 

^JlTJi  {Adonai)  thus  avoiding  its  utterance.  And  as  regards  the 
antiquity  of  this  use,  critics  have  hitherto  been  unable  to  agree. 
Nevertheless  Jewish  tradition  has  boldly  maintained  that  the  use 
began  with  Moses.  And  clearly  the  aversion  of  the  Jews  to  the 
utterance  of  the  Tetragrammaton  is  very  ancient,  but  still  not 


The  Moahite  Stone. 


25 


more  ancient  than  the  Moabite  stone,  for  here  we  have  the  name 
whicli  evidently  was  then  so  common  that  the  Moabites  had  heard 
it  and  now  placed  it  upon  their  triumphal  stone. 

Next  consider  the  distinct  Utiguistic  importance  of  the  stone. 
And  here  \'q  are  reminded  of  a  passage  in  Smith's  Dictionary  of 
the  Bible,  a  passage  which  will  surely  be  revised.  The  writer 
says: 

"  Of  the  language  of  the  Moabites  we  know  nothing  or  next  to  nothing. 
In  the  few  communications  recorded  as  taking  place  between  them  and  the 
Israelites  no  interpreter  is  mentioned.  (Ruth;  1  Sam.  xxii.  3, 4,  etc.)  And 
from  the  origin  of  the  n-^tion  and  other  considerations  we  may,  perhaps, 
conjecture  that  their  language  was  more  a  dialect  of  Hebrew  than  a  diffeieut 
tongue." 

And  the  only  suggestion  offered  by  the  editors  of  the  work,  the 
closing  portions  of  which  in  the  American  edition  have  lately 
come  from  the  press,  is  that  materials  for  an  investigation  of  the 
language  might  be  found  in  some  Moabite  names  preserved  in  the 
Scriptures.  But  a  blaze  of  light  has  now  been  poured  upon  the 
subject  by  the  discovery  of  the  Moabite  Stone,  which  bears  a 
composition  in  the  identical  language  of  that  ancient  people ;  and 
we  no  longer  depend  upon  a  "perhaps  "  or  conjecture.  We  know 
the  absolute  truth.  And  here  it  must  also  be  remembered  that 
the  inscription  of  Mesha  is  something  entirely  distinct  from  the 
cuniform  characters  of  Ni  leveh  and  the  hieroglyphs  of  Egypt. 
It  is  the  oldest  known  original  alphabet  writing  in  the  world,  a 
pre-Maccabean  composition  in  a  language  almost  precisely  like  the 
Biblical  Hebrew.  Its  antiquity  and  purity,  therefore,  render  it 
a  model,  while  from  it  we  may  ascertain  what  were  the  linguistic 
peculiarities  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  in  the  original  manuscripts, 
and  thus  be  able  to  learn  whether  or  not  we  are  following  them, 
when  we  adopt  the  Masorite  editions  with  their  divisions  of  words. 

Now,  while  we  have  hitherto  followed  the  Masorite  custom,  and 
adopted  the  convenient  divisions,  there  have  been  many  indications 
that  went  to  show  the  prevalence  of  the  Scriptio  continua.  With 
a  few  unimportant  exceptions,  we  know  that  those  ancient  exam- 
ples with  which  we  were  hitherto  acquainted,  including  the  oldest 
Fhenician  inscriptions,  made  no  divisions  of  words.     The  Mar- 


fT 


!■■  ; 


2fi 


The  Moahite  Stone. 


)  >    \ 


('' 


f  I 


! 


seilles  stone  and  the  Ashmunesar  sarcophagus  *  of  Sidon,  how- 
ever valuable  in  other  respects,  go  to  confirm  the  authority  of  the 
Hcriptio  continua.  From  all  these  things  it  has  been  argued  that 
in  the  original  Scriptures  there  was  no  division  of  words,  and  that 
the  convenience  of  division  is  an  innovation.  Besides  it  was  said, 
and  with  truth,  that  the  oldest  editions  of  the  Scriptures  show 
divisions  of  words  different  from  those  accepted  at  present,  and  also 
that  the  Jews  wrote  a  certain  number  of  consonants  on  one  line, 
which  was  made  an  unvarying  rule  for  the  rest,  and  could  not 
have  been  one  more  or  less.     They,  therefore,  followed  the  usage 


*  The  following  is  a  translation  of  the  inscription  on  the  stone  found  at  Sidon  fifteen 
years  ago,  by  Dr.  T  joinpson. 

"  In  the  month  Bui,  in  the  fourteenth — xiv. — of  my  reign,  King  Ashmunazer,  the 
King  of  the  Sidonians,  son  of  Tabnith,  King  of  the  Sidonians,  King  Ashmunazcr,  King 
of  the  Sidonians  spake,  saying,  I  am  snatched  away  before  my  time,  like  the  flowing  of 
a  river.  Then  I  have  made  a  house  for  my  funeral  resting  place,  and  am  lying  in  this 
sarcophagus,  and  in  this  sepulchre  the  place  which  I  have  built.  My  prohibition  to  every 
royal  person  and  to  every  man  not  to  open  my  sepulchre,  and  not-to  seek  with  me  treasures, 
nor  to  take  away  the  sarcophagus  of  my  funeral  couch,  nor  transfer  me  with  my  funeral 
couch  upon  the  couch  of  another,  and,  if  men  command  to  do  so,  listen  not  to  their  opinion, 
because  every  royal  person,  and  every  man  who  shall  open  this  funeral  couch,  or  who  shall 
take  away  the  sarcophagus  of  this  funeral  couch,  or  who  shall  transfer  me  with  the  funeral 
couch,  he  shall  have  no  funeral  with  the  dead,  nor  bo  buried  in  a  sepulchre,  nor  leave 
behind  them  son  or  posterity  ;  and  the  holy  gods.  Vrith  the  king  that  shall  rule  over 
them,  shall  cut  off  that  royal  person,  and  that  man  who  has  opened  my  couch,  or  who 
has  abstracted  this  sarcophagus,  and  so  also  the  posterity  of  that  royal  person,  or  of  that 
man,  whoever  he  may  be;  nor  shall  his  root  be  planted  downward,  nor  his  fruit  spring 
upward  ;  and  he  shall  be  accursed  among  those  living  under  the  sun,  because  I  am  to  bo 
pitied — snatched  away  before  my  time,  like  a  flowing  river.  Then  I  have  made  this 
building  for  my  resting  place,  for  I  am  Ashmunazer,  King  of  the  Sidonians,  son  of  Tab- 
nith, King  of  the  Sidonians,  grandson  of  Ashmunazer,  King  of  the  Sidonians;  and  my 
mother,  luimiastoerth,  priestess  of  Astarto,  and  sovereign  queen,  daughter  of  King  Ash- 
munazer, King  of  the  Sidonians.  It  is  we  who  have  built  the  temple  of  the  gods  *  * 
in  Sidon  by  the  sea,  and  the  heavenly  powers  have  rendered  Astarte  favorable. 
And  it  is  we  who  have  erected  the  temple  to  Esmuno,  and  the  sanctuary  of  Ene  Diiiil 
in  the  mountain.  The  heavenly  powers  have  established  me  on  (he  throne  ;  and-it  is  wo 
who  have  built  the  temple  of  the  gods  of  the  Sidonians  in  Sidon  by  the  sea,  the  temple  of 
Baal  Sidon,  and  the  temple  of  Astarte,  the  glory  of  Baal  Lord  of  Kings,  who  bestowed 
on  us  Dor  and  Joppa,  and  ample  corn  lands  which  are  at  the  root  of  Dan,  extending  the 
power  which  I  have  founded,  they  added  them  to  the  bounds  of  the  land,  establishing 
them  to  the  Sidonians  forever. 

''  My  prohibition  upon  every  royal  person  and  upon  every  man  who  shall  open  upon 
me,  or  uncover  me,  or  shall  transfer  mo  with  this  funeral  couoh ;  lest  the  holy  gods 
desert  them,  and  cut  off  that  royal  person,  or  that  man,  wuoever  he  may  be,  and  their 
posterity  forever." 

The  Land  and  the  Book,  Vol.  I.  p.  201.  See  also,  "  M6moire  sur  le  sarcophage  et  L' 
Inscription  Fun6raire  D'Kschmounazar  lloi  de  Sidon.  Par  M.  L'Abb6  J.  J.  L.  Barges. 
Paris,  1866." 


i 


Tlie  Moahite  Stone. 


27 


of  antiquity.  But  then  what  was  the  usage  of  antiquity  ?  That 
of  course  must  be  settled  by  its  oldest  known  alphabetical  monu- 
ment, winch  is  the  Moahite  Stone.  This  sets  aside  all  the  ingenious 
learning  that  has  been  brought  to  bear  against  our  Masorite 
usage.  While  its  character  is  Phenician,  its  language  is  Moabite, 
and  nearer  to  the  Hebrew  than  to  the  former,  as  close  as  the  Phe- 
nician tongue  may  approximate  to  the  Hebrew.  And  in  this 
monument  the  words  are  divided  with  points,  and  the  text  is 
divided  into  verses  by  vertical  strokes.  There  is  every  reason 
then  to  believe  that  this  was  the  custom  in  the  original  Hebrew, 
preserved  in  modern  Synagogue  Rolls  which  reject  the  vowel 
points,  on  account  of  their  modern  origin.  We,  therefore,  ration- 
ally infer  that  the  Hebrews,  so  intimately  allied  to  the  Moabites 
in  everything  else,  for  example  as  in  their  syntax  and  parti  jles, 
must  have  followed  them  in  their  punctuation  also. 

Again,  on  the  question  in  regard  to  the  use  of  the  scriptio 
plena  and  scriptio  defectiva  of  the  Masorite  text,  some  have 
argued  that  the  vowel,  consonants  or  matres  lectionis,  forming  the 
mnemonic  sign  ^IflJ^  {Ehevi) — when  they  indicate  a  vowel  did  not 
occur  in  the  original  Hebrew.  This  point  is  discussed  very  fully 
by  Dr.  Ginsburg,  who  shows  that  the  argument  is  without  founda- 
tion, and  that  the  Moabite  Stone  proves  that  the  vowels  were 
originally  represented  by  the  consonants  ^"lill<  {Ehevi)',  which,  of 
course,  is  a  very  important  point  to  establish. 

Finally  we  have  to  speak  of  the  Paleographical  importance  of 
the  Moabite  Stone.     Says  Dr.  Ginsburg — 

"  In  this  respect,  this  triumphal  Pillar  is  perfectly  peerless,  inasmuch  as 
we  obtain  an  alphabet  which  is  more  than  a  century  and  a  half  older  than 
any  other  Epigraphic  document  containing  the  same  species  of  writing ; 
and  it  is  three  centuries  older  than  the  Sarcophagus  of  Eshr^unazer,  which 
has  hitherto  been  considered  the  most  ancient  inscription  of  iny  considera- 
ble length." 

Having  already  described  the  characters  employed  as  Pheni- 
cian (though  it  should  be  remembered  that  these  characters  were 
generally  employed  by  all  the  chief  nations  at  that  time,  even 
though  the  Phenicians  did  invent  them)  we  come  directly  to  the 
point  before  us,  and  inquire  what  makes  the  inscription  so  import- 
ant in  the  palajographical  view.  This  importance  arises  from  the 
fact  that  it  gives  us  fresh  knowledge  in  regard  to  the  number  of 


28 


The  Moabite  Stone. 


r. 
ii 

■;   ! 

?! 


'V. 


I': 


A/ 


V 


letters  contained  in  the  primitive  alphabet,  from  which  the  Greek 
characters  were  derived.  Herodotus  tells  us  that  the  Phenicians 
who  accompanied  Cadmus  gave  the  Greeks,  among  other  things, 
the  letters  of  the  alphabet.  Pliny  also  says,  that  the  Cadmean 
alphabet  brought  into  Greece,  contained  sixteen  letters  ;  and  that 
afterwards  Palamedes  and  Simonides  each  added  four.  He  also 
gives  the  affirmation  of  Aristotle,  that  there  were  originally  eighteen 
letters,  two  more  being  added  by  Epicharmus,  instead  of  Pala- 
medes. It  has  accordingly  been  declared  that  the  original  Sem- 
itic alphabet  contained  only  sixteen  letters.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  Alphabetical  Psalms  and  Poems,*  the  initial  letter  of  each 
verse  of  which  begins  with  a  letter  of  the  alphabet,  from  which 
it  appears  that  there  were  originally  twenty-two.  In  opposition 
to  this  it  has  been  replied  that,  at  some  post- Babylonian  date, 
these  compositions  were  recast,  and  the  acrostic  arrangement 
devised  to  suit  a  more  modern  alphabet.  But  this  is  swept  away 
by  the  Moabite  Stone,  which  was  erected  nine  hundred  years 
before  Christ,  and  contains  twenty-two  f  letters,  demonstrating 
t'lRC  even  long  before  this  time,  twenty-two  letters  were  in  use. 
/  The  integrity  of  the  Scriptures  is  thus  maintained,  in  a  most  un- 
expected manner,  by  the  oldest  alphabet  writing  in  the  world. 
This,  every  one  must  concede,  is  an  advantage  of  no  little  magni- 
tude. 

The  Moabite  stone  also  shows  us  the  origin  of  the  forms  of  the 
Greek  alphabet,  whose  archaic  characters  are  identical,  we  may 
say,  with  those  of  the  Moabites.  This  will  appear  from  a  com- 
parison of  the  forms,  which  have  already  been  conveniently  tabu- 
lated, in  parallel  lines,  including  also,  the  alphabets  of  the  Esh- 
munazer  and  Marseille  Stones,  and  the  Assyrian  Tables  and  Gems, 
the  forms  being  arranged  according  to  their  respective  age.  The 
Archaic  Greek  is  thus  as  it  were,  traced  back  to  the  ancient 
quarry  from  which  it  was  taken  ;  for  instance,  the  Greek  Xi,  a 
perpendicular  line  with  three  cross  bars  (rjr),  said  to  have  been 
invented  by  Simonides  (530  B.  C.)  being  easily  identified  with  the 
Moabite  Samech. 

We  have  now  nearly  reached  the  limits  of  the  space  proposed 

*  P».  25,  34,  37,  101,  112,  119,  145 ;  Prov.  31 :  10-31 ;  Lam.  1-4. 
f  We  say  twentj-two  because  Teth  has  clearly  been  lost  from  the  word  ataroth  in  the 
eleventh  line. 


ll-^ 


The  Moahite  Stone. 


29 


for  this  Article,  and  must  draw  to  a  close.  Yet  we  may  neverthe- 
less remark,  that  in  the  treatment  of  this  subject  little  account  has 
been  taken  of  the  differences  of  opinion  expressed  thereon  during 
the  past  year  by  various  writers,  for  the  reason  that  much  has 
been  written  that  appeared,  not  only  a  little  pedantic,  usefully  so 
we  trust,  but  premature.  Revision  has  been  the  task  of  nearly 
all  those  who  have  labored  on  tlie  Moabite  inscription  not  in  vain. 
And  in  the  future  we  shall,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  have  a  more  perfect 
text,  and  also  learn  more  of  the  methods  employed  to  secure  the 
present  so-called /rtc-s«?M?7t'.  Still  the  general  views  of  the  subject 
most  recently  laid  before  the  public,  will  probably,  in  the  main,  be 
permitted  to  stand.  At  the  outset  a  somewhat  exclusive  advan- 
tage was  claimed  for  the  inscription  by  several  individuals ; 
and  hence  Professor  Rawlinson  insisted  upon  the  paleographical 
value  of  the  stone  p.t  the  expense  of  its  historical  character,  aver- 
ring that  it  fell  far  behind  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  in  respect  to 
the  illustration  of  Sacred  History,  and  that  stones  with  the  cuni- 
form  letter,  equal  in  value  to  the  Moabite  stone,  are  being  brought 
to  light  every  year,  without  attracting  any  special  notice.  Yet 
while  no  one  can  easily  undervalue  the  revelations  from  Nineveh, 
it  is  still  undeniable  that  the  Moabite  inscription  asserts  its  lessons 
in  a  peculiarly  pointed  manner,  and  that,  few  as  may  be  its  words, 
they  necessitate  a  revision  of  a  numerous  class  of  cognate  educa- 
tional and  philological  works  relating  to  the  Hebrew  language  and 
literature.  Accordingly,  we  believe  that  no  competent  critic  will 
be  found  at  last  cherishing  a  desire  to  take  away  aught  from  any 
of  the  special  values  now  claimed  for  the  inscription,  but  that 
scholars  and  antiquaries  will,  with  a  general  consent,  allow  the 
high  and  enduring  usefulness  of  its  varied  peculiarities.  And 
this  suggests  the  importance  of  keeping  in  mind  the  great  differ- 
ence between  the  Moabite  Stone,  and  that  of  Marseilles  and 
Eshmunazer.  As  valuable  as  may  be  the  latter,  they  cannot  after 
all  be  compared  with  the  new-found  pillar  of  Mesha.  While  the 
Marseilles  slab,  and  the  coffin  lid  of  the  Sidonian  King,  after 
furnishing  valuable  material  for  the  compilation  of  Phenician 
grammar,  pass  into  comparative  obscurity,  the  Moabite  Stone 
must  hold  its  place  in  the  practical  studies  of  the  Biblical  scholar, 
and  form  a  sort  of  standard  reference  on  certain  questions  in 
theological  schools. 


r^l »  ,<  Ml         III 


^   1' 


■— ^ 


tmmm 


9i 


1 

' 


30 


The  Moabite  Stone. 


!     ' 
I 


'  1 1   li 


u 


.•)  !       1 


But  shall  this  be  the  last  of  the  Moabite  atone  ?     Is  it  doomed 
to  stand  out  in  its  present  solitariness  in  the  barren  field  of  Moab- 
ite Literature;  or  shall  it  be  regarded  simply  as  the  first  fruits  of 
a  generous  antiquarian  and  Biblical  harvest?     This  is  a  question 
for  our  people  to  decide,  since  it  is  highly  probable  that  the  de- 
serted cities  and  crumbling  palaces  of  ancient  Moab  have  other 
treasures  waiting  to  reward  the  well  directed  labors  of  a  liberal 
zeal.     It  is  true  the  author  of  the  Article  on   "Moab"*  already 
referred  to,  speaking  of  the  fulfillment  of  the  "  Burden  of  Moab," 
assures  us  that   "  we  shall  never  know  who  the   '  lords  of   the 
heathen '  Avere  who,  in  that  terrible  night,  laid  waste  and  brought 
to  silence  the  prosperous  Ar-moab  and  Kir-moab.     On  the  occa- 
sion of  that  flight  over  the  Arnon,  when  the  Moabite  women  were 
huddled  together  at  the  ford,  like  a  flock  of  young  birds,  pressing 
to  cross  to  the  safe  side  of  the  stream,  when  the  dwellers  in  Aroer 
stood  by  the  side  of  the  high  road  which  passed  their  town  and 
eagerly  questioning  the  fugitives  as  they  hurried  up,   '  What  is 
done  ?' — received  but  one  answer  from   all   alike — '  All  is  lost ! 
Moab  is  confounded  and  broken  down  !'  "     Yet,  now  that  the  dis- 
covery of  the  Moabite  Stone  is  on  record  we  must  not  adopt  the 
language  of  doubt.     A  proud,  wealthy  and  civilized  people  like 
that  of  Moab,  the  rivals  of  the  more  favored  Jews,  and  a  people 
whose  boastful  prosperity  was,  so  to  speak,  prophesied  at  for  a 
space  of  nearly  two  hundred  years, — certainly   found  more  tri- 
umphs to  record  than  one.     It  is  therefore  the  business  of  societies 
like  that  of  the  American  Palestine  Exploration  Fund  to  search 
for  their  monuments,  to  uncover  the  grass-grown  walls,  to  lift  up 
the  fallen   columns,  to  restore  the  shattered    tablets    of   Moab. 
This   is  a  work  intimately  connected   with  the   illustration  and 
vindication  of  the  Word  of  God.     It  is  true  that  there  are  diffi- 
culties  to   be   met.     The    "  Sick   man    of  the   East,"    a  pitiful 
anachronism  compounded  of  weakness  and  tyranny  that  the  pro- 
gress of  civilization  should  ere  this  have  forever  swept  away,  is 
watching  the  explorer  with  a  jealous  eye.     The  Bedouins  them- 
selves are  suspicious,  and  far  from  reliable.     But  the  disciples  of 
Mahomet  can  be  bought  with  backsheesh,  and  the  most  Jesuitical  fir- 
man can  be  transmuted  into  an  accommodating  document  with  a 


*  See  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible. 


"^t^mmmmmm 


The  Ilodbite  Stone. 


31 


little  gold.  The  first  thing  really  needed  is  a  proper  appreciation 
of  the  importance  of  the  work  to  be  done,  and,  second,  a  suitable 
supply  of  funds.  Confidence  in  the  enterprise  is  mentioned  first, 
because  the  mental  creates  the  material,  and  the  earnest  faith  and 
purpose  of  liberal  American  Christians  cannot  successfully  be  de- 
nied. If  they  say  that  the  thickly-strewn  ruins  of  Moab  shall  be 
explored,  it  will  be  done. 

And  besides  there  is  a  greater  charm  about  this  country  than 
many  suppose.     It  is  true  that  the  long  suspended  judgment  pro- 
claimed by  Jeremiah  at  last  fell  upon  the  people.     Openly  did  they 
deride  those  words,  "  For  because  thou  hast  trusted  in  thy  works 
and  in  thy  treasures,  thou  shalt  also  be  taken :     and  Chemosh 
shall    go  forth    into   captivity  with  his  priests    and  his   princes 
together.     xVnd  the  spoiler  shall  come  upon  every  city,  and  no 
city  shall  escape:     the  valley  also  shall  perish,  and  the  plains 
shall  be  destroyed,  as  the  Lord  hath  spoken."    (Chap,  xlviii.  7,  8.) 
But  the   tented  traveler  today  realizes  their  truth,  and  on  the 
very   ground  where  Meslia  set  up  his   Triumphal  Pillar,   he  also 
reads  again,    "  Thou  daughter  that  dost  inhabit  DiBON,  come  down 
from  thi/  glory,  and  sit  in  thirst ;  for  the  spoiler  of  Moab  shall  come 
upon  thee,  and  he  shall  destroy  thy  strong  holds."     Yet  we  can 
but  take  a  deep  interest  in  Moab,  and  long  to  know  more  of  its 
past.     The  people  sprang  from  the  same  stock  as  Israel,  and  in 
common  with   the   Canaanites,  they  used  an   almost  identical  lan- 
guage.     They    enjoyed  at    times   pleasant  intercourse   with  the 
Hebrew  nation.     To-day  the  ashes  of  Moses  rest  in   Moab  where 
God  buried  him ;  buried  him  in  an  unknown  grave,  and  (let  those 
who  yearn  for  peculiarly  consecrated  ground,  and  the  perpetua- 
tion of  enmities  after  death,  remember  it,)  hard  by  the  sanctuary  of 
Baal-Peor,  the  false  one  to  whom  during  life  Moses  was  an  im- 
placable foe.     Moab  was  the  country  of  Elijah,  who  "  was  a  man 
of  Gilead."     The  Israelites  journeyed  this  way  when  approaching 
the  land  of  Canaan,  and  afterwards  friendly  and  devout  Jews  re- 
sorted to  Moab  in  a  season  of  famine.     Then  the  Perean  days  of 
our  Lord,  occupying  portions  of  the  last  five  months  of  His  public 
life,  carried  Him  to  this  country,  where  He  delivered  some  of  His 
tenderest  instructions,  and  where  His  soul  overflowed  in  marvelous 
acts  of  divine,  disinterested  benevolence.     While  who  can  ever  for- 
get that  this  land  was  the  home  of  the  grandmother  of  King 


L 


/j^S^i^KfTSy 


32 


The  Moahite  Stone. 


'■'    1 


David,  the  gentle  and  loving  Ruth,  who  clave  to  Naomi's  God, 
and  whose  idyllic  story  will  touch  the  hearts  of  countless  readers 
to  the  end  of  time  ?  It  is  this  land,  invested  with  so  many  vener- 
able and  tender,  as  well  as  tragic  associations,  our  present  land  of 
Biblical  promise — that  the  reverent  antiquary,  earnestly  desiring 
to  know  the  truth  of  history  and  eager  to  illustrate  the  Divine 
Word,  is  invited  to  enter,  and,  in  a  sense  that  no  Mohametan  fir- 
man contemplates,  make  his  own. 

We  have  referred  to  the  American  Palestine  Exploration  So- 
ciety. In  connection  with  the  English  Society,  it  proposes  to  act 
at  once,  and  ere  this  summer  goes  by  one  or  more  of  its  agents 
will  perhaps  be  abroad,  searching  among  the  ruins  of  Moab,  a 
field  to  which  it  has  been  specially  assigned  by  the  English  So- 
ciety, the  latter  intending  to  confine  itself  to  its  old  and  selected 
ground.  Americans  should  therefore  feel  a  deep  interest  in  the 
work,  a  work  that  for  ages  has  been  waiting  to  be  done,  and  which 
is  a  work  whose  accomplishment  would  perhaps  at  no  period  have 
appeared  so  grateful  as  it  would  now:  and  whose  accomplishment, 
moreover,  has  possibly  been  reserved  until  our  own  time  to  meet 
by  its  fruition  the  assaults  of  a  Strauss  and  the  sneers  of  a  Kenan. 


'S\ 


H 


i^^. 


